Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

sciencedaily.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 386 posts

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#61

Post by phito »

scns wrote: post #48
Podgajski wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of dogs also like to bite people, or scare birds, or scare other dogs…. Just because something likes to do something does not mean we should let it do it.

A few dogs are so aggressive that they bite people. Usually the owner is the problem.

You clearly don't understand how dogs function. The sweetest dog could bite someone if it is scared, startled, in pain, sick. They can be unpredictable and most people do not know how to read a dog's body language. I say that as someone who loves and has dogs.

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#62

Post by Podgajski »

mjburgess wrote: post #51
Podgajski wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For some reason you don’t think of the sign as conversation. Why not? Our community has put up the sign and when I read that sign I engage in that conversation. Rules that are agreed on are not authoritarian unless we have no choice in changing them. Since we vote, we have a say on changing them. What you’re saying is, we should have no laws and do whatever we want. We should have no rules and do whatever we want. I’…

We can have signs and rules, and the rest of it. But we're talking about you wanting to go to the police to enforce one of them. If a sign is seen as a 'strong suggestion', as 'advisable' or a 'please do this' then there's no issue -- that's what signs are. But you didnt see the sign that way; and that's what i'm responding to. Your impulse was to bring the disciplinary arm of the state to bare to enforce someone's o…

If the laws are not enforced, then people don’t obey the laws. That’s how you get both dog bites and white collar crime.

Your assumption is that my “wanting to bring the disciplinary arm of the state“ is based on the rules, and not on my compassion. That’s where you’re wrong. I was using the rules of the state to enforce my compassion, not to enforce the rules. in this case, the rules aligned with my compassion.

And in fact, I would not call police if I saw someone shoplifting. And that’s what people don’t understand about those of us with Asperger‘s. It is a sense of right and wrong not based on rules, but based on right and wrong.

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#63

Post by Podgajski »

verisimi wrote: post #54
mjburgess wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might be important to realise that signs and rules are made up by sign-makers and rule-makers; often to their benefit. Reality doesnt come with a rule about leashing dogs on grass. It feels like something is going wrong here in your connecting a dog being off a leash with somehow empathy for the dog. I read your impulse to act here as your mind being hijacked by the sign-maker to conscript you into their preferred…

Yes, well said. Is it awareness and an application of injustice, or awareness of certain rules that are being applied only partially - the rules could go further. Because justice and riles are assuredly not the same thing. Who knows the truth to determine what is just for others? Ultimately, justice is best expressed by the golden rule: Do not treat others in ways that you would not like to be treated. Dogs are at a…

no, the nuance is not about rules, the nuance is about right and wrong.

It’s wrong for someone to walk around with an animal that could be dangerous or could harm other people or itself. In this case, the rules aligned with my moral understanding.

Ashan sense of right and wrong is not based on outside rules, but it are internal perception. This is why many of us have anti-authoritarian tendencies.

https://neuroclastic.com/autism-and-responding-to-authority/...

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#64

Post by mjburgess »

Podgajski wrote: post #62
mjburgess wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can have signs and rules, and the rest of it. But we're talking about you wanting to go to the police to enforce one of them. If a sign is seen as a 'strong suggestion', as 'advisable' or a 'please do this' then there's no issue -- that's what signs are. But you didnt see the sign that way; and that's what i'm responding to. Your impulse was to bring the disciplinary arm of the state to bare to enforce someone's o…

If the laws are not enforced, then people don’t obey the laws. That’s how you get both dog bites and white collar crime. Your assumption is that my “wanting to bring the disciplinary arm of the state“ is based on the rules, and not on my compassion. That’s where you’re wrong. I was using the rules of the state to enforce my compassion, not to enforce the rules. in this case, the rules aligned with my compassion. And…

My claim is that your compassion is being hijacked, not that you're blinding following an instruction. Compassion is one of the main emotional mechanisms of social discipline: it is the overbearing mother. Compassion is often the most vicious way of policing people, as its users takes themselves to be moral.

The sign couldve been a poster of a dog off a leach running around with another dog, having a good time. That, I imagine, would likewise trigger a positive emotion in you.

What i'm advocating for is more of a gap between the sign and the emotion. I dont think the sign would be as effective if it were a command read out by 'some average looking person'

the sign here has a special quality in triggering an emotional response, because the usual moderating triggers are absent: those of the falibility of a person

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#65

Post by Podgajski »

pnut wrote: post #58
Podgajski wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, I posted this study because I have Asperger’s and this is what was always said about my behavior. Yesterday I literally had to stop myself from sending photographs to the police of a guy walking his dog off leash in a park that has signs forbidding it. And my reason for wanting to call the police is because of my compassion for the dog or for anyone the dog to hurt. Not so much that it was only that the man was d…

Curious what stopped you. Consider that narc'ing people for victimless crimes is something that can be done to you as well, and you definitely will make enemies and earn a reputation by casually reporting people to the police... so maybe just "leave people alone" is a good default policy.

I stopped, because I know how cruel people can be. I’ve had a lifetime of doing this and seeing the outcomes. People are vengeful, but today people are more on edge and more likely to carry a weapon.

For example, I nearly gotten murdered on an Amtrak train once, because a man was talking loudly, and I asked him if he could please be quiet because he was clearly disrupting everyone and no one else was speaking up. I spoke up, and he followed me off the train and I had to run into the station to get help.

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#66

Post by Podgajski »

mjburgess wrote: post #59
veeti wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are literally countless videos online of unleashed dogs attacking other dogs, animals, children and adults. Even if you think your precious Fifi would never do such a thing a leash keeps them safe and close to you in the event something happens or scares them off. For this reason using a leash is not only a recommendation on a sign but the law in many locales.

I don't have a dog, but i've known many and never a dangerous one. In the UK its very common to have large parks with dogs just running around; I'm not aware of any cases where this has caused a problem. I've no objection to the rule. My issue is with how the rule is being interpreted. If someone were to ask, 'please keep a leash on' i'd expect people to be polite enough to do so. But that's the gravity of the situat…

Can you imagine if the whole country was run this way? Please don’t steal things from other peoples houses.

In this case, the discipline on the person who would be a fine. What do you think they’re going to do? Beat him and throw him in jail?

As I said, I’m an advocate for anarchism, so my view on the police should be clear. But we do not live in an anarchistic society, and this is all I have to work with. unlimited freedom for each individual is untenable. That’s what you are looking for. I’m going to make the obvious observation that you’re probably a libertarian.

The truth is that the dog owner was not being compassionate to other people, rather he was focusing so on himself. He was being selfish, and that to me was the moral failing here, it had nothing to do with the rules, as I said, but the rules aligned with my moral beliefs.

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#67

Post by Podgajski »

mtreis86 wrote: post #44
Podgajski wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, I posted this study because I have Asperger’s and this is what was always said about my behavior. Yesterday I literally had to stop myself from sending photographs to the police of a guy walking his dog off leash in a park that has signs forbidding it. And my reason for wanting to call the police is because of my compassion for the dog or for anyone the dog to hurt. Not so much that it was only that the man was d…

I've never had a loose dog try to attack me. Plenty of dogs on leashes have lunged tho. So I treat the leash status as a signal of how much the owner trusts the dog to behave.

Your anecdotes are not data. For example. I can count no less than six times when off leash dogs tried to bite me. The most recent one was when two pitbulls and a Labrador charged at me.

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#68

Post by mrangle »

OfSanguineFire wrote: post #16
Yoric wrote: post #7

Anecdotal evidence: around me, several kids are on the autistic spectrum. It's hard to prevent them from intervening when they notice what they feel is an injustice, towards them or others. At some point, this included one of them regularly attempting to rescue babies from baby trolleys, which they considered a prison. Fortunately, the would-be rescuer was only aged 3 at the time.

I don’t think that concern for injustice is something universal or even necessarily widespread among autistic people. That is, I believe that there are plenty of autistic people who do not give a fuck, eschew social causes completely, feel misanthropic, etc. Rather, I think that the examples you encountered represent that segment of autistic people who do care, and due to the difficulty that autistic people have with…

By the same mechanism, Autistic people may be less likely to agree with the social group's view of an example of injustice. Especially if the wider agreement has a contagious element that oversees its facts. Instead, ASD people may be more prone to attending to injustices that they can individually percieve.

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#69

Post by metaphor »

mjburgess wrote: post #13
Podgajski wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, I posted this study because I have Asperger’s and this is what was always said about my behavior. Yesterday I literally had to stop myself from sending photographs to the police of a guy walking his dog off leash in a park that has signs forbidding it. And my reason for wanting to call the police is because of my compassion for the dog or for anyone the dog to hurt. Not so much that it was only that the man was d…

It might be important to realise that signs and rules are made up by sign-makers and rule-makers; often to their benefit. Reality doesnt come with a rule about leashing dogs on grass. It feels like something is going wrong here in your connecting a dog being off a leash with somehow empathy for the dog. I read your impulse to act here as your mind being hijacked by the sign-maker to conscript you into their preferred…

This struck me as so absurdly anti-social with a pinch of blatant dismissal for why certain rules in public spaces exist to begin with that it reads like you're intentionally trolling the parent in bad faith.

You know what also doesn't care about the rules of ordered society and the potentially deadly consequences of breaking them? Animals.

Disagree? Only a fool spitting into the wind would permit me to unleash my seemingly subservient Dobermann into the "reality" of instinct for just a minute while we had that hot debate in a public park. I care about its life---and the lives of peaceful strangers there to also enjoy the public space, and the lives of birds making a pitstop on a long migratory journey, and the lives of squirrels that call a resident tree home, and even your life when you decide to raise your voice in a way that may or may not be perceived as threatening---to recognize the unabashed arrogance of doing so.

That's the empathy perspective you're missing.

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#70

Post by SpaghettiCthulu »

nyanmatt wrote: post #20

“With autism” A large portion of the autistic community is very against this phrasing. Autism is not a disease you carry, or something you “have”. It should be used as an adjective to describe a person: “Autistic people less likely to succumb to bystander effect” Edit: If you follow through to the actual paper referenced you can see they use the correct phrasing.

Most people with autism don't care at all.
Post reply on HN