digitalwanderer
Legend
Moderation is for the birds and site admins. 
Apparantly im mental...
- Thread starter Squilliam
- Start date
I was wondering if I had a list of certain B3D members if that makes me mental?
Actually its funny, I had meds, I stopped meds, I feel better. Why? Lithium is evil? But it makes such cool hybrid cars so how can it be evil?
A list of heroes of course! 
Actually its funny, I had meds, I stopped meds, I feel better. Why? Lithium is evil? But it makes such cool hybrid cars so how can it be evil?
I scored a 33 (took the test without reading posts or the description of it) but have good empathy. Just always see patterns and usually just don't care at all for chit chat or the 'regular' side of conversations. If someone mentions they knit, for example, I immediately want to know how the different profiles of the needles affect kniting patterns in different humidities
...where the cotton is sourced...that sort of thing. But I know how to be more normal so don't feel like I have bad social skills.Found XKCD for the first time a few days ago. That was 12:30AM. At something like 3:30AM, I decided it was time to sleep.
I was wondering if I had a list of certain B3D members if that makes me mental?
A list of heroes of course!
Actually its funny, I had meds, I stopped meds, I feel better. Why? Lithium is evil? But it makes such cool hybrid cars so how can it be evil?
Different meds work differently on different people. There is no one cure for this stuff. You have to try different meds, or maybe you don't respond to meds at all.
That simple.
Blitzkrieg
Newcomer
What an interesting test. I scored 37.....
That xkcd comic was great, I have a habit myself of never stepping on cracks or trying to follow straight lines or edges of the pathways etc etc, always find some pattern..
That xkcd comic was great, I have a habit myself of never stepping on cracks or trying to follow straight lines or edges of the pathways etc etc, always find some pattern..
Agreed, it emphasizes the math and logic too much, and requires too much interpretation on the social questions. Which is a problem with most of those tests. I'm pretty social and empathic, but very analytical as well, which tends to skew the results.
Blitzkrieg
Newcomer
Does that mean all forms of empathy? No empathy at all would suggest to me that those with aspergers are also sociopathic/psychopathic to a degree.
From the little I have read it more seemed like lack of empathy in a communication setting rather than as a whole.
From the little I have read it more seemed like lack of empathy in a communication setting rather than as a whole.
That's a hard question to answer.
While the obvious measurement might seem Ego <=> Empathy, that is considered healthy and competitive until you enter psychopathic territory.
Kant offers a better understanding: their world view doesn't allow other, independent entities (humans, animals), and/or it is so different from the norm that there is no meaningful communication. Which mostly amounts to the same thing.
For example, while I don't care all that much how other people or media tell me that things work and interact, (experiencing and understanding things for myself is more important), I develop it mostly through interaction and communicating with others. So while my world view definitely isn't "average", I don't lose track with the world and people around me. Because they supply the input, and I think and experiment with those concepts until they make sense to me.
So, yes, I do watch, listen, try to see it from their POV, and learn
But sometimes it's pretty hard to do so, if the communication doesn't offer a common baseline. Which makes me increase my effort to understand.Now consider someone who is put on the wrong track at a very early age (interpreted a few observations differently and came to a very different conclusion), and there is no common ground to be able to understand and place the feedback offered, because it isn't understood. They can develop a functional and consistent world view, that is so different from the mainstream one, that it is extremely hard for them to communicate with other people.
Which is a lot easier than it sounds like, as there is an unlimited amount of coherent world views that seem to work. If there weren't, we wouldn't feel the need to discuss things. But because we can and do, means we have most of it in common, so we can understand each other.
Like, you tell them something and they ignore it outright because it doesn't make any sense to them, or they get the direct meaning: "Put on your shoes!", but lose track shortly afterwards as they don't understand why they should do so. "Go to school!" is such an open-ended task, that it loses all meaning when they start thinking about it.
For engineers and scientists, the world operates in a very different fashion than for entertainers and politicians. And computers offer a very strict, logical and coherent world that is quite different from the mainstream one as well, and even allows all those virtual ones at the same time.
Then again, if you understand the concept of there being multiple world views that are all viable and work, you're not autistic, and very empathic.
Blitzkrieg
Newcomer
Hmm I think I consider my learning style similar to yours Frank. I feel personal experience and understanding can bring much clearer understanding. Though I always like to gather as much information from as many sources as possible, esp on less "scientific" matters as I believe it gives a truer mean/average and understanding of the subject. I wouldn't say I lose track of individuals or the world around me but more that they concept/idea or task is more important than the individual.
I do find sometimes that at work, a task or question is so open ended it makes my head spin. Sometimes the variables feel so overwhelming it basically stops me dead in my tracks from completing or solving what is asked. I wouldn't say it loses meaning but unless the parameters are better defined I feel I can't answer or do of what is asked and it can get extremely stressful.
I understand there are multiple world views, though that doesn't mean I believe they are right or correct or even really work. I don't understand why people won't accept or like a stronger level of scientific reasoning in policy and cultural development. However I strongly believe in freedom of choice/belief even if their views lack of logic gives me flashes of quite strong anger.
I do find sometimes that at work, a task or question is so open ended it makes my head spin. Sometimes the variables feel so overwhelming it basically stops me dead in my tracks from completing or solving what is asked. I wouldn't say it loses meaning but unless the parameters are better defined I feel I can't answer or do of what is asked and it can get extremely stressful.
I understand there are multiple world views, though that doesn't mean I believe they are right or correct or even really work. I don't understand why people won't accept or like a stronger level of scientific reasoning in policy and cultural development. However I strongly believe in freedom of choice/belief even if their views lack of logic gives me flashes of quite strong anger.
I get the same way, but what does it mean? I find uncertainty completely overwhelming. Sometimes I even get stumped over which chocolate bar to buy and when im at the restaurant im usually the last one to order because I need to read the menu 3-5 times before ordering and usually I have to shortlist between 3-5 items before deciding.
I understand some people have difficulty with this. Unless it is particularly crippling, I'm not sure it's an issue.
Many times, I use a few tricks to speed up my own decision-making.
At a restaurant, for instance, I know that there are likely to be many dishes I will enjoy, and so I don't concern myself over-much with which specific dish I choose in the end. So one of the first things I often do is do a quick scan of the menu, and note the first dish that sounds good. I then file that away as being the dish I'll pick if I can't come to a decision later. I may not get the dish I would like the most at that restaurant, but all I want is an enjoyable meal, and it won't really matter terribly if it isn't the absolute best I could have.
Fixed that for you.
Fixed that for you.
Bacon? Why bacon?
I usually avoid the first dish that has bacon because it would require me to ask first if the bacon is free range, and like the question on Napolean Dynamite, 'do the chickens have large talons?' it gets a similar response.
It's a stupid internet meme... I suppose this place's a bit too highbrow for that sort of stuff. (Although I'm very partial to bacon in hamburgers, and in Swedish national dish 'pytt i panna'...)
Also, I never saw Napoleon Dynamite, so you'll have to clue me in on the chicken talon thing.
Also, I never saw Napoleon Dynamite, so you'll have to clue me in on the chicken talon thing.
"A good engineer will only give you a direct answer if they already solved it."
I do have that as well, and the trick is to scrap anything undefined or problematic, and come up with a minimal, working solution to what you think is the basic problem, before you hit a wall or your boss gets restless.
Don't try to do it all, but think about what you can do, and do that.
Because, just about all the time, the others don't have a very good idea about what they want or how to do it, either.
Yes, and I agree, but it depends on your benchmark (science, in our cases). Everyone has their own priorities, and you need a logical and curious mind to use science for that.
A politician will have a completely different set of benchmarks, which mostly revolve around: "Does it increase my influence?" And an entertainer tries to evoke as much positive emotions as possible.
Religion (which includes things like astrology, tarot, homoeopathy, aura's, chackra's, talking to ghosts, telekinesis, telepathy and many other things not directly related to Gods), is also a very compelling and internally consistent baseline.
Those are all very fulfilling outlooks, that can be surprisingly accurate without any direct scientific explanations, and work very well. As history shows us.
I did experiment with most of those, and they do work. But the framework required is very different from the scientific one, so it can be hard to grasp, if you haven't got the right inclination.
