Autism and Mind Blindness

[rousseau]

To get right to it, I have a few people in my life with Aspergers Syndrome, co-workers and family members, and in recent months I've been trying to better understand how their minds work, and what the lived experience is like for them. This is all with the understanding that people with Autism are diverse, and the problem can't be exactly generalized.

Mind Blindness refers to a poorly developed theory of mind where, at least some, with Autism have trouble understanding the intentions and motivations of other people.

My question about this is:

• Can some with Aspergers or Autism learn theory of mind, it just happens at a slower rate than average?
• What is the lived experience of someone with poor theory of mind like?

 

[Jarhyn]

To get right to it, I have a few people in my life with Aspergers Syndrome, co-workers and family members, and in recent months I've been trying to better understand how their minds work, and what the lived experience is like for them. This is all with the understanding that people with Autism are diverse, and the problem can't be exactly generalized.

Mind Blindness refers to a poorly developed theory of mind where, at least some, with Autism have trouble understanding the intentions and motivations of other people.

My question about this is:

• Can some with Aspergers or Autism learn theory of mind, it just happens at a slower rate than average?
• What is the lived experience of someone with poor theory of mind like?

So, I'm autistic and there are a few other people here that are as well, I would imagine.

And remember, this is itself a theory of mind, developed by an autistic person mostly on their own...

It's not quite like that, really.

Imagine that you have a bunch of chunks in your brain, or perhaps rooms, or pieces, or nodes, whatever.

Each of these chunks or pieces, at least in the set I am trying to single out, is responsible for learning a "person", and most such bits are on one side of the brain.

Then when you interact with a person, really you are planning your interaction against this empathetic copy of them that's trying to pick them apart from all your observations of them.

Autistic people tend to have less connectivity to that system, or they simply use that part of their brain for different things, kind of like using a GPU to process calculations for a process rather than using it to process graphics.

This does not create a "poor theory of mind". It just makes others incomprehensible because the bits in the brain that do that automatically for others don't do it for them, so they have to develop that process explicitly, all on their own, and it is endlessly tiresome to emulate.

I don't know if you noticed, but people communicate a complicated number of things, and actually having to process that through a formal theory of mind rather than an implicit one is actually quite difficult.

The problem is that a lot of shit people do is either arbitrary or just plain badly communicated or not communicated at all and they don't understand that, because THEY are the ones who actually lack a theory of mind.

Neurotypical people rather have an "experience of mind" rather than a "theory of mind". Autistic people are some of the only people I meet who EVER actually form the latter.

If you want to know what the experience is like for someone tied to explicit theory of mind, however, in a word it is exhausting. Something you were born with millions of years of specialization for us is just absent, and we have to build it from scraps and ignorance, and because you lot just take it all for granted, nobody ever bothers even figuring it out themselves let alone explaining it.

 

[rousseau]

To get right to it, I have a few people in my life with Aspergers Syndrome, co-workers and family members, and in recent months I've been trying to better understand how their minds work, and what the lived experience is like for them. This is all with the understanding that people with Autism are diverse, and the problem can't be exactly generalized.

Mind Blindness refers to a poorly developed theory of mind where, at least some, with Autism have trouble understanding the intentions and motivations of other people.

My question about this is:

• Can some with Aspergers or Autism learn theory of mind, it just happens at a slower rate than average?
• What is the lived experience of someone with poor theory of mind like?

If you want to know what the experience is like for someone tied to explicit theory of mind, however, in a word it is exhausting. Something you were born with millions of years of specialization for us is just absent, and we have to build it from scraps and ignorance, and because you lot just take it all for granted, nobody ever bothers even figuring it out themselves let alone explaining it.

I recall years ago I wondered if I might be on the spectrum as some of the qualities are there, and these days I seem to have pieced together an explicit theory of mind, as you suggest. Now I'll often understand others better than most, if nothing else because of a pure depth of knowledge and insight. And over time I learned to come across less like Sheldon Cooper, I guess what you would call 'masking', and more like what people actually want from me. But yea, it takes a lot of mental processing to pull off.

And I agree with you about others not bothering to figure it out. IMO, many of us are good at seamlessly deploying cached responses in given situations, that don't actually require much thought.

But it fascinates me thinking about someone like my mother-in-law who is in her 60s and still doesn't understand fundamental concepts about human behavior. Maybe some of us just aren't able to piece it together, while others are?

 

[Jarhyn]

To get right to it, I have a few people in my life with Aspergers Syndrome, co-workers and family members, and in recent months I've been trying to better understand how their minds work, and what the lived experience is like for them. This is all with the understanding that people with Autism are diverse, and the problem can't be exactly generalized.

Mind Blindness refers to a poorly developed theory of mind where, at least some, with Autism have trouble understanding the intentions and motivations of other people.

My question about this is:

• Can some with Aspergers or Autism learn theory of mind, it just happens at a slower rate than average?
• What is the lived experience of someone with poor theory of mind like?

If you want to know what the experience is like for someone tied to explicit theory of mind, however, in a word it is exhausting. Something you were born with millions of years of specialization for us is just absent, and we have to build it from scraps and ignorance, and because you lot just take it all for granted, nobody ever bothers even figuring it out themselves let alone explaining it.

I recall years ago I wondered if I might be on the spectrum as some of the qualities are there, and these days I seem to have pieced together an explicit theory of mind, as you suggest. Now I'll often understand others better than most, if nothing else because of a pure depth of knowledge and insight. And over time I learned to come across less like Sheldon Cooper, I guess what you would call 'masking', and more like what people actually want from me. But yea, it takes a lot of mental processing to pull off.

And I agree with you about others not bothering to figure it out. IMO, many of us are good at seamlessly deploying cached responses in given situations, that don't actually require much thought.

But it fascinates me thinking about someone like my mother-in-law who is in her 60s and still doesn't understand fundamental concepts about human behavior. Maybe some of us just aren't able to piece it together, while others are?

Yeah. It took me... 30 years to just figure out how to do a "sidewalk shuffle", or a "conversational 3 body problem".

 

[rousseau]

FWIW, here is some research on empirical problems with research done on Autism and Mind Blindness, which seems to back up your theory:

Empirical Failures of the Claim That Autistic People Lack a Theory of Mind

The claim that autistic people lack a theory of mind—that they fail to understand that other people have a mind or that they themselves have a mind—pervades psychology. This article (a) reviews empirical evidence that fails to support ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

I was also reading about Theory of Mind more generally recently, which suggested that it's a skill that everyone learns through their lives. So maybe it's less a question of the autistic component (which is multi-variable and can mean a lot of different things), and more a question of someone's innate intelligence. Someone with a small capacity to learn is likely going to have a poorly developed theory of mind, even if they don't show autistic traits. While someone with autistic traits can be very intelligent, and subsequently develop a robust theory of mind.

Maybe those with autism skew a little bit toward 'less socially capable', but it's not a bulletproof rule as some learn to adjust.

 

[Jarhyn]

FWIW, here is some research on empirical problems with research done on Autism and Mind Blindness, which seems to back up your theory:

Empirical Failures of the Claim That Autistic People Lack a Theory of Mind

The claim that autistic people lack a theory of mind—that they fail to understand that other people have a mind or that they themselves have a mind—pervades psychology. This article (a) reviews empirical evidence that fails to support ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

I was also reading about Theory of Mind more generally recently, which suggested that it's a skill that everyone learns through their lives. So maybe it's less a question of the autistic component (which is multi-variable and can mean a lot of different things), and more a question of someone's innate intelligence. Someone with a small capacity to learn is likely going to have a poorly developed theory of mind, even if they don't show autistic traits. While someone with autistic traits can be very intelligent, and subsequently develop a robust theory of mind.

Maybe those with autism skew a little bit toward 'less socially capable', but it's not a bulletproof rule as some learn to adjust.

Well, it's easier to pick it apart when you have both hints and pressure.

A brain that always gives you the answer will let you be dumb, perhaps for forever.

A brain that offers only most answers will make someone slowly develop a solid theory, after many years and a general suspicion of their occasional failures.

A brain that offers few hints, but the occasional good hint will build a robust theory of mind quite quickly, and be exhausted by the effort.

A brain that offers no hints or consistently bad ones will be a hindrance and they will be just as technically unaware as the person whose brain answers for them every time... But on the opposite side of functionality.

The thing is, when it comes to autistic people, usually there's a  thing, some special situation or show or idea or system which they find affinity for.

It can happen at many different ages, but until then, usually whoever it is is listless and just kind of disinterested in most things. Sometimes it's a progression of things?

But the point is, there's things that drop into our brains and we have to figure everything out about them, and close a solution on them.

Once the solution closes, either they find something new and work on that or that's who they are for the rest of their lives.

For me it's like having an itch that I scratch by reflecting on a chain of ideas until some loose end cleans up through a connection or replacement of a bad grammar, or the placement of a good grammar where one was lacking entirely, or even placement of some triggered invasive statement, though I'm not very good at getting those to stick.

For others it's doing much the same but figuring out where in a chain of actions one has to insert a "jump" to get past a brick in Super Mario Brothers.

My big thing shoved me out into the world, because the things I want to understand require me to see and understand the world around me, because I "cheated" and picked "literally everything" as the solution I wanted to close on.

 

[rousseau]

My big thing shoved me out into the world, because the things I want to understand require me to see and understand the world around me, because I "cheated" and picked "literally everything" as the solution I wanted to close on.

This is an interesting comment, and similar to how I've experienced things. When I was in my teens I had a kind of vague sense of how strange it was just to be alive, and so was really curious about most things. But being a quick learner I rifled through hobbies and topics pretty quickly.

By my early thirties I was working next to a massive academic library and by that point the desire for knowledge was close to obsession. I'd cart home 4 - 5 (or more) books at a time. With access to that much knowledge for free, you learn fast.

What I didn't anticipate is that I'd eventually hit diminishing returns and run out of interesting things to read about. I always seem to find something new these days, but it's almost always pretty esoteric.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I suspect I'm mildly on the spectrum. (The Asperger's screening quiz puts me well in Asperger's territory. However, the actual diagnostic criteria are a 2 of 4 thing--and I see 1 yes, 2 no and 1 maybe--insufficient data. DSM V has different categories but again it's a 2 of 4, 1 yes, 2 no, 1 insufficient data. I don't see anything to be gained by talking to a doc about it even if my evaluation of those maybes is wrong. Without a Mr. Fusion there's no getting the missing data. (Why does everyone focus on the flux capacitor? That kind of power out of a package that small without a RUD is astounding.))

As far as I can tell the social things that are automatic for most people require deliberate thought for me and if I don't realize there's something that needs thinking about I'll completely miss them.

 

[Jarhyn]

I suspect I'm mildly on the spectrum. (The Asperger's screening quiz puts me well in Asperger's territory. However, the actual diagnostic criteria are a 2 of 4 thing--and I see 1 yes, 2 no and 1 maybe--insufficient data. DSM V has different categories but again it's a 2 of 4, 1 yes, 2 no, 1 insufficient data. I don't see anything to be gained by talking to a doc about it even if my evaluation of those maybes is wrong. Without a Mr. Fusion there's no getting the missing data. (Why does everyone focus on the flux capacitor? That kind of power out of a package that small without a RUD is astounding.))

As far as I can tell the social things that are automatic for most people require deliberate thought for me and if I don't realize there's something that needs thinking about I'll completely miss them.

Everyone can be like that from time to time. For some people the connection is heavier or lighter, and the pull to the things is stronger.

Like, I can often get away with just my bag most days, but some days I just need my hat, and sometimes I can do my hat and stick...

The point is, while I have options I can't choose "none".

If I try to choose "none" theres just something in me that objects quite heavily.

 

[barbos]

I suspect I'm mildly on the spectrum.

You call it mildly?

I have a practical question. Apparent lack of sense of humor, how prevalent is that for autistic people?
I have known few people who had troubles with that. It was a long time ago and nobody knew about autism.
I learned not to joke around them.

 

[Jarhyn]

I suspect I'm mildly on the spectrum.

You call it mildly?

I have a practical question. Apparent lack of sense of humor, how prevalent is that for autistic people?
I have known few people who had troubles with that. It was a long time ago and nobody knew about autism.
I learned not to joke around them.

It depends on how heavily one feels the "eliminate nonsense to close systems of thought" impulse.

Jokes involve a juxtaposition in which some setup happens which violates an expectation. Generally, at least for me, it's fine if and only if the joke is telegraphed somehow, and the joke is not insulting about a person or behavior or group which is benign given the context.

 

[barbos]

Well, I guess no Seinfeld for you!
And since you asked for telegraphing, it was a reference to "Soup Nazi" episode.
But then again, you did not watch it.

 

[Jarhyn]

Well, I guess no Seinfeld for you!
And since you asked for telegraphing, it was a reference to "Soup Nazi" episode.
But then again, you did not watch it.

Actually I did see that episode.

I just always found Seinfeld petty, tasteless, and rather unnecessarily cruel to folks.

I know what people find funny in it and why, but none of that stands up to a good hard shove. A lot of it is bare masking of shitty behavior and no more.

Too many people use jokes like a smokescreen to their impulse to be evil to one another in some way, and many autistic people don't just brush it off because too often they are on the receiving end of something ugly, masked in that same smokescreen.

 

[rousseau]

Well, I guess no Seinfeld for you!
And since you asked for telegraphing, it was a reference to "Soup Nazi" episode.
But then again, you did not watch it.

Actually I did see that episode.

I just always found Seinfeld petty, tasteless, and rather unnecessarily cruel to folks.

I know what people find funny in it and why, but none of that stands up to a good hard shove. A lot of it is bare masking of shitty behavior and no more.

Too many people use jokes like a smokescreen to their impulse to be evil to one another in some way, and many autistic people don't just brush it off because too often they are on the receiving end of something ugly, masked in that same smokescreen.

I've had enough shade thrown my way through the years that I also don't have a lot of tolerance for cruelty, in any form. When it comes my way I usually let it slide off my back. Ad Hominem is more a reflection of the one committing it than anything else.

My experience with humor is that a lot of what passes for it isn't actually that funny. Not in the 'it's cruel' sense, more in the 'it's unoriginal or uninteresting' sense. On this forum I likely come across as pedantic and serious, but only because I'm here to learn and discuss, not make jokes. In the real world I make people laugh all the time. Others I know that are a little deeper on the spectrum also have a well developed sense of humor.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I suspect I'm mildly on the spectrum.

You call it mildly?

I have a practical question. Apparent lack of sense of humor, how prevalent is that for autistic people?
I have known few people who had troubles with that. It was a long time ago and nobody knew about autism.
I learned not to joke around them.

I don't have any of the sensory issues or the like, just messing up with social things.

 

[Jarhyn]

I suspect I'm mildly on the spectrum.

You call it mildly?

I have a practical question. Apparent lack of sense of humor, how prevalent is that for autistic people?
I have known few people who had troubles with that. It was a long time ago and nobody knew about autism.
I learned not to joke around them.

I don't have any of the sensory issues or the like, just messing up with social things.

With sensory it's more... Some things you just can't ignore, and for some thoughts, a brain needs to not have certain things interrupting.

Usually it's like one of those "shoot the water gun at the target to fill the tube" kinda deals. If the thing is bad enough, it can exceed a limit, but if it's something that can be escaped and an escape route is known, it can be livable.

 

[Elixir]

I'm autistic and there are a few other people here that are as well, I would imagine.

Are there benefits to “being autistic”? ‘Cuz if there are, I’m all over that shit! Where can I apply? I know I can ace any test for it.

 

[steve_bank]

I had a high school techer who said when you study psychology you first have to be grounded in normal psychology. Otherwise people can identify with symptoms and otherwise healthy people can tihink themselves mnetally ill.

I imagine some can identify with a malady for a sense of identity.

There is an endlaees stream of peoe in the news from regular people to well known people saying they rea depressed and have an anxiety dsorder. I womder how many of them are thinking themselves into believing they are clinically depressed when they are not.

 

[barbos]

I just always found Seinfeld petty, tasteless, and rather unnecessarily cruel to folks.

OK, do you like any sitcoms?
And why did you watch it if you did not like it?

 

[Jarhyn]

I'm autistic and there are a few other people here that are as well, I would imagine.

Are there benefits to “being autistic”? ‘Cuz if there are, I’m all over that shit! Where can I apply? I know I can ace any test for it.

Sometimes there are benefits to being just very physically small.

They come at the expense of all the benefits of being very physically large.

Sometimes you can be so physically large that while you can do some really cool and unique things, you can't do some other really important things. Sometimes one of the things a really physically large person will be unable to do is "wipe their own ass".

It's not something you can give yourself or take away from yourself, though. It's caused by a different pattern of white matter arrangement and orientation.

To be clear, I know you are joking, I just don't care.