In search of a truce in the autism wars • Hacker News Board

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#141

Post by Nomentatus » Fri, May 03, 2019, 2:46 PM UTC

analognoise wrote: post #101

I have kids. If I knew I was going to have an autistic one, I'd have aborted. We only have to put up with this until there's a screening test. Then the problem will take care of itself, like the way Tay-Sachs is disappearing.

As frequently noted here the definition of "Autism" has changed, and now folds in Asperger's Syndrome. You're talkin' old definition; but even then you're assuming no compensating features in relatives (which the multiple-copy alpha tryptase genetic trait, to name one likely suspect, almost certainly confers.)

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#142

Post by ionised » Fri, May 03, 2019, 2:50 PM UTC

Nomentatus wrote: post #136

ionised wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hikikimori is not synonymous with introversion.

Only "H implies I" is necessary for his statement to go through, not "H IFF I." Do you intend to say that recluses who are mostly interested in what other people are up to, or think, exist?

But he didn't make a statement, he asked a question about why the previous poster mentioned Japan with regards to extraversion when they have such a thing as hikikimori.

By comparing the two he appears to be suggesting that hikikimori are just introverts, and as such proof that Japan does in fact have a cultural obsession with extraversion.

It's not the assertion that Japan is a largely extraverted country that I took issue with (though I would say it is debatable), it was the (it seems to me) equating of introverts and hikikimori.

I just wanted to point out that hikikimori are not introverts. Introversion is not a mental illness. Hikikimori may very well be, depending on the individual.

I find that most people have a poor understanding of the introversion/extraversion spectrum and wrongly attribute things like social anxiety, timidity, lack of confidence agoraphobia etc. to introversion.

Then again I may have misunderstood the point of his question and read too much into it.

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#143

Post by Nomentatus » Fri, May 03, 2019, 2:52 PM UTC

watwut wrote: post #18

PaulHoule wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that severely autistic people have an emotional life as real as anyone else, probably more empathy than they are able to express, but neurotypicals have a hard time having empathy for them. Thus i think the puppet is insulting to severe autists as well as less severe autists. It is typical neurological thinking to see somebody different as less than human.

One problem is that the lack of ability to express empathy oftentimes come across as cruelty. Not always, but quite often.

Well, honestly, it often directly creates cruelty, I've witnessed consistent breathtaking cruelty from one adult on the spectrum; but in contrast to that, people on the spectrum have explained to me that emotional over-stimulation is just as painful to them as any other kind; and that those on the spectrum (but not too severe) therefore have the difficult choice to become empaths affected by everything others experience (or evince) or just shut it down and (functionally) lose empathy. As a general rule, most human beings choose to avoid pain, but not all.

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#144

Post by 0815test » Fri, May 03, 2019, 2:56 PM UTC

TheOperator wrote: post #132

klonderdonk wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d argue that it’s only autism if it’s severe. During the 1980’s being socially awkward wasn’t a clinical medical condition. If you disrupted class in the 1980’s, you got taken out of general population, and put into special education with a high ratio of teachers or aides, and received a proximity of attention as needed, and that was your generalized clinical marker for genuine problems. The consensus of the elemen…

>If you can brush your teeth, comb your hair, tie your shoes, and iron and fold clothes but choose not to then you aren’t autistic. "Choose" is an awkward word here. There are autistic people who will do alk these things, have a slight road bump on life, and it will all fracture apart. Then they will self-isolate for awhile and eventually emerge and try it again. There's a sort of category of people who can do these…

> There are autistic people who will do alk these things, have a slight road bump on life, and it will all fracture apart.

This happens to everyone, including neurotypicals. It's what used to be known as a nervous breakdown, and more recently is labeled as acute stress disorder. Sure, the level of stress resilience can differ greatly among individuals, but that's the point: it's a difference in degree, not in kind!

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#145

Post by Nomentatus » Fri, May 03, 2019, 3:01 PM UTC

0815test wrote: post #24

watwut wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One problem is that the lack of ability to express empathy oftentimes come across as cruelty. Not always, but quite often.

Well, there are quite a few people who lack empathy to such an extreme extent as to be quite cruel to others. We all want to avoid these people, so we expect those we interact with to express strong empathy-signals, and distrust them if they won't. It's absolutely normal for autists to be inconvenienced by this, since - their empathy-ceilings being lower, as a rule - they have to pay a higher personal cost than most…

Wow, you're assuming that the neuro-diverse can mimic these signals so much better than sociopaths that any citizen will cheerfully hand them a (false!) "yes quite empathic" sticker. And that they can do so at little cost! Not so and not so. The usual result of this strategy is that in return for their heroic efforts, the neuro-diverse person appears "very plastic" and falls heavily into the "uncanny valley." This can result in extremely intense antipathy to them.

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#146

Post by 0815test » Fri, May 03, 2019, 3:06 PM UTC

TheOperator wrote: post #139

0815test wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Retaliation is a strategic last resort that is intended to deter cruel people from hurting us, when appeals to empathy are expected to be ineffective. If someone hurts you accidentally, and you can tell (because he can reliably express empathy), you won't retaliate; you'll ask for an apology. If someone hurts you out of cruelty , expecting an apology is actually counterproductive; you'll either get the authorities in…

Okay. So if you're autistic and upset somebody have a choice now. Tell people you're disabled so they don't take offence but stigmatize/patronize you instead. Or tell people nothing and let them be pissed off at you. They will jump right to retaliation like you say for seeing you as cruel. No matter what you do. You always lose. The only escape is withdrawal. Temporary or permanent.

Wait, what? If you show that you're willing and able to take responsibility for what you did, and engage in compensation as needed, no one will be offended. Indeed, many will be favorably impressed because this is not something that antisocial people do often - as a rule, such people tend to be highly entitled, and have trouble with the whole idea of engaging in a successful negotiation with others. There is no quicker way to encourage the stigmatization/patronization of autism, than allowing the term be used as an excuse or a get-out-of-jail-card for bad behavior!

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#147

Post by Nomentatus » Fri, May 03, 2019, 3:06 PM UTC

0815test wrote: post #57

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it shouldn't go unmentioned that at the same time, the reliance on those signals is a huge vulnerability that is massively being abused by manipulators? I guess you could say that is how authoritarian leaders get into power. So, it's not so obvious it's actually a useful mechanism. Rather, it seems that it maybe works better in small structures and/or for short time horizons, but regularly leads to catastroph…

It is being abused, but not "massively"; it's working just fine in many other cases which are just not explicitly salient to us. Only the very best manipulators are able to fool others about being sufficiently empathetic and even then, only just barely; many, perhaps most people can see through the ploy but go along with it for all sorts of recognizable reasons. (By and large these are not good reasons, of course.)

Remember, this is one of those situations where you don't have to outrun the lion - just the other guy. But here, the other guy has advantages over someone who's neurodiverse. Asking every autistic person to outmimic sociopaths (with fewer diverse traits) who dedicate their lives to such mimicry is asking the impossible. Psychopaths aren't rare, violent psychopaths are rare.

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#148

Post by Nomentatus » Fri, May 03, 2019, 3:14 PM UTC

geofft wrote: post #28

DiseasedBadger wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're perspective is flawed. You can't assume everyone is equally able to speak for themselves. One might not speak ill of a tyrant one has no prospects of escaping.

That's generally because one fears retribution from a tyrant. Autism is not a tyrant and has neither desire nor means of retribution, so your argument makes no sense. You're just grasping at explanations to dismiss arguments that make you unhappy.

The poster thinks 'tis neurotypicals which one cannot escape, I believe.

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#149

Post by Nomentatus » Fri, May 03, 2019, 3:15 PM UTC

ausbah wrote: post #67

DiseasedBadger wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're perspective is flawed. You can't assume everyone is equally able to speak for themselves. One might not speak ill of a tyrant one has no prospects of escaping.

>You can't assume everyone is equally able to speak for themselves. Okay some people can't speak for themselves, what gives you in particular any authority to speak for those who can't? Even then, that doesn't deal with the matter of those who can speak for themselves.

Charity, sometimes. Self-interest other times, but maybe charity this time. As long as children exist, we'd best all be capable of speaking for at least some of those who can't speak easily for themselves.

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#150

Post by watwut » Fri, May 03, 2019, 3:17 PM UTC

0815test wrote: post #36

watwut wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I meant that people on the spectrum can come across as cruel or abusive or hurt others without intention to and regardless of what they feel inside. That is not about signals only. I mean the impact on others is there. Unintentional, but real. Then it leads to retaliation which in misunderstood and whole thing may lead to escalations and at worst bullying. That is more then inconvenience.

Retaliation is a strategic last resort that is intended to deter cruel people from hurting us, when appeals to empathy are expected to be ineffective. If someone hurts you accidentally, and you can tell (because he can reliably express empathy), you won't retaliate; you'll ask for an apology. If someone hurts you out of cruelty , expecting an apology is actually counterproductive; you'll either get the authorities in…

Retaliation is something people do. Sometimes as last resort, oftentimes as warning or attempt to look like bad target to pick. Yet other times out of habit. Plenty times it is done out of anger not as thought out strategy.

Also, people do not see inside other people. Not just that, but when you are causing someone harm, you not meaning to will become irrelevant after certain treshold. That person will move to protect himself or his friends will mve to protect him.