Connection between Autism and CT thinking?

reply to post by SpaceJ


-dyslexia = no; hyperlexic. I naturally speed read taking in large chunks and automatically falling upon key words.

-dysgraphia = no

-dyscalculia = negative. I'm hypercalculic with savant quality speed and precision.

-dyspraxia = not sure. There's certainly people who I've known that are much more clumsier than I.

-ADHD = yes, most of the time, but not always. I seem to have several moods/modes of operation. One of them is certainly adhd.

-OCD = severe at times. It's really weird that a lot of things that seem to be common in others for OCD doesn't effect me, like washing hands constantly or keeping a tidy place. My OCD is internal, and more of an insane thought process that keeps looping.

-CAPD = Yes, but it seems to be different than yours. I don't have a jumbling that takes place, rather I simply can't filter out any incoming sensory information. If I'm in a mall, my mind has to cope with attempting to process hundreds of conversations all at once, while manually putting all of these to the side so that I may understand the person talking to me just two feet away. I'm the guy that always has to talk louder than others, but never notices he does that.

-Pacing = Yes, I do this as well. I've read it's simply a right-brain thing. My father does this as well. He's a lefty, too. It happens especially when we're on the phone and need to concentrate. Pacing back and forth, and communicating with our hands flapping all over the place is quite common!

-Stemming = Yes. My brother has stems worse than I do usually. I only get finger tapping and leg shaking, but he does weird things with his eyes, and snaps his wrist a lot OCD like. I'm pretty sure my brother and my father are somewhere on the spectrum as well. They just prefer to say they're wired differently than most, and I think that's perfectly fine.

-Repetition = Yes. I will listen to the same song over and over again, and when I'm not listening to it, I will usually still hear it internally for another day or two nonstop! I often watch the same documentaries several times through to make sure that I get all of the information integrated properly.

reply to post by YouCanCallMeKM


Here's the way I see it, it's a matter of perception mostly. We use labels for a reason. Same reason that I'm able to lay down these characters online and you can decipher them. It's because this allows us to communicate and transfer information. The same thing goes for the labels. They allow us to agree upon how things are, and communicate more effectively.

You're correct that everyone is unique, so these labels never seem to match 100%. Still, they do us good enough at present time to point us in a direction where we may more easily find assistance and treatment options. Not that having AS can or should be cured, rather that when too much difficulties are reached, certain help programs can lessen the severity of symptoms and provide a higher quality of life. What's wrong with that?

As long as you can get by without having any huge issues, then the label may be more of a detriment than benefit. In that case, believe what you will and don't worry about the label. If you are having issues, and do seek answers, well... the label may help you out. You are not the label, it is merely an attempt to aptly describe some of the abnormal behavior. Don't let the label ever control who you think or feel you are. That's just foolish. Gotta run. Cheers!

Hey guys and gals, I'm going through this remarkable website atm, and feel that you all need to check this out. It seems my issue may lie with what's referred to as right-brain caetextics. Not all too sure about this yet, but will continue to devour this site and come to a conclusion soon.

Check it out:

Caetextia as the universal deficit seen in Autism

Wow, this is very weird. I find it hard to think about this all. I certainly had a lot of contextual problems as a child, but they mostly evened out as I matured. I think it's more having to do with experience, and going through a lot of mistakes, than actually neurologically progressing or what have you. I do have a very difficult problem with metaphors, but have memorized enough to gain a general understanding of what to look for in some of them. I tend to take everything very literally that people say, but have realized that once the ridiculousness of the literal statement reaches a certain point, there must be a different meaning involved that I'm just not grasping.

As for not being able to understand bigger pictures, this is where I don't seem to have the issue. I see impersonal big-picture scenarios with ease. It's what has drawn me into CT's. The fact that I'm making connections that other people overlook for whatever reason.

reply to post by unityemissions


That was a really interesting article, thanks for that. Is that a term used in Europe? I can't say I've heard of it here in the US. Very interesting indeed. I never knew Anne Rice was Autistic, I've read all her books. Are they saying that Caetextia and autism are the same thing or different? Or are they saying that they think Asperger's is Caetextia and not Autism? That part confused me, because when I googled it I found a Canadian article saying it was a new definition for Asperger's.

I often wonder if it's not just a normal personality variant, but then there are things like the CAPD and OCD tendencies and especially sensory issues that make me think it must be something more. And I wonder how there can be such a difference between what they term "higher" and "lower" functioning Autism. But I'm definitely open to outside of the box thoughts on the topic, because I really think doctors here in the US don't hardly have a clue about AS or Autism unless they specialize in it. Australia seems to be leading in research into the matter, with Tony Attwood redefining the understanding of AS specifically.

This was on a wiki page so I suppose someone random wrote it, but it makes good points nonetheless.

The term Aspergers is bandied about these days in a way similar to, 'oh he's a Scorpio you know', it seems to be common and lots of people use it as a label (even my 10 year olds say, 'he's a bit aspie' about odd people on TV. So what criteria is this diagnosis based on, is it any more valid than an astrology fan's observation of behaviour? How accurate can this 'Label' be? Is Caetextia (context blindness) more accurate or just a different name? Let's start at the beginning, what is Autism? We are all familiar with the DSM type description and I'm sure we have all come across many people given the diagnosis Autistic or Aspergers Syndrome (also known as High functioning Autism or Caetextia); We can say Autistics have a lack of insight into the mental or internal life of others, don't see others' point of view, or have difficulty recognising others' emotions, and have impaired reactions in social situations as a consequence. (We could describe more symptoms, but I think you know them). We could also describe Autistics as being in a 'Trance', or being in a trance state much of the time, depending on the severity of behavioural symptoms; Or daydreamy perhaps in the case of some Caetextics... dipping in and out of the REM state as we all do, but perhaps more frequently or in a different way? In order to attempt to unpack the label 'Autistic', we need to look at the underlying mechanisms. The disorder was originally called 'Childhood Schizophrenia', but Autism has been recognised and documented widely since the fifties; the DSM symptoms can appear individually, or grouped, in many different situations, as they are only a description of behaviour, similar to other 'disorders'... such as extreme PTSD, Fragile X, retardation, accident victims with Brain injuries etc... so what actually makes a person Autistic? What is the mechanism of these symptoms? How can the world's richest multi Billionaire, or a mega famous pop / film star, be said to have the same condition as a mute individual who has spent their whole life in Psychiatric care, ie they are both called Autistic? How can that be? Does Caetextia clearly define the two groups or are they still on the same spectrum? Is it a question of degree of brain damage or is it something else? Is there something hiding beneath the surface which they share in common? So far we know that something has failed to unfold in these individuals, Joe and Ivan allude to 'templates' not being present or expressed; They also drew attention to 'fish like' behaviours, which are our genetic inheritence, we all share gestures built on these patterns, but Autistics revert back to some of them more than others. All of this may be true but doesn't provide a unified theory, or answer many of the questions which thousands of research scientists, parents and individuals are currently seeking answers to. (There are literally millions of pages related to Autism on the web, thousands of sites, web rings, research papers, blogs etc.) So what does it all really mean: missing templates, lack of empathy, mirror neurons missing, emotional disorder, developmental disorder, maternal bonding, No theory of mind...what happened to these individuals, why, how, where and when did they become Autistic?

reply to post by SpaceJ


I haven't a clue what's going on with caetextia. I think maybe it's a new theory that's seeking acceptance within the community, but there seems to be dozens of these. I think these people are saying that all autism seems to have caetextia as the underlying root cause, but that depending on the severity of autism, this may either be the sole manifestation, else only one of many. I think they're implying that people with Asperger's seem to only have caetextia in most cases.

I really don't think it's just a personality variant. I think there's distinct genetic susceptibilities and environmental triggers for manifesting the behavioral patterns associated with autism. Like homosexuality, I think both gays and autistics are showing up in larger numbers due to environmental toxins rather than simply more awareness/acceptance. The genes for becoming gay and/or autistic have been with us for a very long time, but for reasons which we seem not able to currently identify in full, they are being expressed in greater numbers than in previous generations.

reply to post by unityemissions


There are some doctors who think that the whole lack of empathy thing is complete BS actually, as well as the inability to understand figurative language or sarcasm and metaphor, it can be easily learned. I think we just learn it differently, not that we understand it less. As for the empathy and interpersonal stuff, I think I'm the opposite of what the descriptions usually say, I tend to have too much empathy, be too sensitive, and too compassionate people say. Part of why I'm a vegetarian and don't even bother explaining why anymore. And I don't really think I show a lack of concern for others feelings or that I'm less aware of my social surroundings than anyone else, if anything, I'm too aware. Being too aware is what makes you anxious.

The only thing that is a detriment to my social wellbeing is the CAPD making it hard to hold a conversation unless I really know you, it gets better the longer amount of time I spend with someone or the quieter the situation is. And then the sensory issues with sounds being too loud all the time make it impossible to hear what someone is saying to me sometimes, it will look like I'm not paying attention or I'm deaf, but really I just can't tune out the background noise and mean no offence.

Also I think people tend to lop antisocial or sociopathic attributes into people with Autism. I value my alone time simply because my hobbies tend to require isolation or quiet concentration, but that doesn't mean I dislike spending time with people. There's just certain situations that don't work for me for very long that other people might find enjoyable, I'm not meant for parties and bars or clubs and noisy atmospheres like that (though I've been to a lot of concerts which kind of defies the whole sound thing).

I think that lack of empathy and the like would be more indicative of Schizotypal or Narcissistic PD or something like that. I think there's a way to go with psychology/psychiatry and neuroscience in this regard, neuroscience will probably get to the answer sooner. Lots of things in Autism are still unclear including the names of things apparently. I was surprised when they said they would put Aspergers with Autism on the DSM but then in some ways I wasn't. I don't really know what I think about it honestly and labels aren't really important to me. But sometimes if I need to explain my CAPD/sensory issues I don't know how else to quickly/easily/identifiably explain to someone who doesn't know what those individual things are. They are more likely to know what Autism is than if I said CAPD unfortunately. It's all so confusing, even the doctors are confused.

Just to add to that, there are some other things that I guess are mild interferences in social situations but all I can think of are eye contact, being overly aware of my posture which distracts me, and maybe sometimes in extreme situations for me I might miss what a person's gesture means. For example, mistaking a hand shake for someone putting their hand out because they want me to hand them something. Or thinking someone is waving when they are stretching, something silly like that. But I've never had a problem reading facial expressions, though I do know some Autistics do have a very hard time with it. I would say that the not understanding sarcasm or humor is a total misconception nearly everyone I've met with AS could be funny and had a sense of humor and sarcasm. Maybe we are prone to quickly judging a statement as literal, but I also think we can quickly see the error we made, too. Other than that the social difficulties stuff to me is purely auditory/sensory influenced.

reply to post by SpaceJ


Well, we're definitely going to diverge here in a lot of what you've mentioned. I can't comprehend 90%+ of humor, and don't get sarcasm whatsoever. I don't just take some things literally, I take nearly everything literally. Lacking empathy is clearly seen in most instances of autism. It may be that this is the left-brain caetextia at play, I really haven't a clue.

Things are simply different in the way I process. Some things I'm overly sensitive and emotional towards compared to the norm, and other things I'm hardly sensitive or emotional towards compared to the norm. It just depends on if I grasp the situation and can relate. Sometimes I see no logical reason behind the emotion, so it seems entirely invalid and outright bizarre to me. If I can see a logical reason behind it, then it becomes valid. Perhaps this is why I'm so interested in how our emotional states have an instinctual underpinning. Once I realized this, it opened up the way for me to see many more emotional situations as having a logical, instinctual reason behind them, and therefore being entirely valid.

reply to post by unityemissions


Well I mean that some people portray Autistics as totaly devoid of emotion and humor, robots, or something, soulless people incapable of laughter. We can laugh, we can have senses of humor, but they are usually different, and if we don't laugh it's probably because it wasn't funny. There are some emotions that are peculiar to me, especially in other women/girls, I was always friends with more boys for that reason. I don't get the act of bickering, gossiping, lying, cheating, vindictive manipulation, jealousy to an extent, and other such things, seem irrational to me. Basically all the crafts it takes to fit in with a group of women. When I was a kid I had a harder time with sarcasm but I specifically tried to teach myself sarcasm and sayings that people use, I had to learn it like someone would learn anything else, basically studied it. As for empathy, one thing I do know about myself is that I've always felt more connected to animals than people, but other than that I'm pretty average as far as empathy goes. I have a hard time expressing certain emotions in relation to empathy, like showing someone I'm sorry for them when a loved one dies or something, that feels awkward at times stuff like that, but that doesn't mean I don't "feel" it, I just don't know how to relay in physically/verbally. Hugging anyone other than my husband and mother is also uncomfortable, but that's more of a physical contact/personal space issue I think, I might want to hug a friend in a certain situation calling for a hug, but it just doesn't feel right to me. Similar to the eye contact issue I guess.

I just think that the definitions of AS/ASD are disorganized, it's so jumbled, there needs to be more order to it. They want to make AS be under ASD and then grade everyone by subtypes and numbers of severity. That sounds like a better idea than they have currently at least. They need to re-figure the prevalence in males, females with ADHD go undiagnosed for the same reason that females with ASD go undiagnosed. Boys in grade school with ADHD/ASD are more likely to be disruptive and act out, therefore getting noticed and having the problem addressed, where as girls tend to be quiet and non-disruptive and so no one bothers with them. It is ridiculous to hear a doctor tell a girl they can't have ASD because it's only found in boys. These professionals need to pick up their books and do some continuing studies.

reply to post by unityemissions


I think I do the same too in respect to having overly emotional response to something weird and a less emotional response to something that commonly elicits an emotional response, yep. Kinda backwards I guess, sometimes. Little things may bother me, and then a huge thing might not bother me at all.

Originally posted by SpaceJ
reply to post by unityemissions

 

Well I mean that some people portray Autistics as totaly devoid of emotion and humor, robots, or something, soulless people incapable of laughter. We can laugh, we can have senses of humor, but they are usually different, and if we don't laugh it's probably because it wasn't funny.

Fully agreed. When I say I don't get 90%+ of humor, I mean I don't find the punchline humorous. I get that there is slight cognitive dissonance occurring, but it usually seems like a very obvious connection. There isn't enough cognitive dissonance for me to get worked up about it. It basically seems retarded to me. At the same time, I can be quite hilarious. I often just do my thing and when I'm in a good mood, people flock to me and get a bunch of chuckles. I've been told that when I'm in a good mood, there's a quality to my presence that is very inviting, and when I'm in a bad mood, the quality turns very dark, and people are cautious to approach me.

Originally posted by SpaceJ
There are some emotions that are peculiar to me, especially in other women/girls, I was always friends with more boys for that reason. I don't get the act of bickering, gossiping, lying, cheating, vindictive manipulation, jealousy to an extent, and other such things, seem irrational to me. Basically all the crafts it takes to fit in with a group of women.

Will you marry me?

Originally posted by SpaceJ
When I was a kid I had a harder time with sarcasm but I specifically tried to teach myself sarcasm and sayings that people use, I had to learn it like someone would learn anything else, basically studied it. As for empathy, one thing I do know about myself is that I've always felt more connected to animals than people, but other than that I'm pretty average as far as empathy goes. I have a hard time expressing certain emotions in relation to empathy, like showing someone I'm sorry for them when a loved one dies or something, that feels awkward at times stuff like that, but that doesn't mean I don't "feel" it, I just don't know how to relay in physically/verbally. Hugging anyone other than my husband and mother is also uncomfortable, but that's more of a physical contact/personal space issue I think, I might want to hug a friend in a certain situation calling for a hug, but it just doesn't feel right to me. Similar to the eye contact issue I guess.

Pretty much agree here as well. I feel more of a connection to animals as well. I also seem to experience empathy to a large degree, and have trouble expressing these feelings appropriately. Hugging is very weird. I used to have a strong aversion to it, but now it's not so bad. It does change though. If I've been overstimulated recently, then physical contact is a big no-no. If I've been decompressing and feel open to my surroundings, then I may just give ya a big bear hug, lifting you off the ground and all.

Originally posted by SpaceJ
I just think that the definitions of AS/ASD are disorganized, it's so jumbled, there needs to be more order to it. They want to make AS be under ASD and then grade everyone by subtypes and numbers of severity. That sounds like a better idea than they have currently at least. They need to re-figure the prevalence in males, females with ADHD go undiagnosed for the same reason that females with ASD go undiagnosed. Boys in grade school with ADHD/ASD are more likely to be disruptive and act out, therefore getting noticed and having the problem addressed, where as girls tend to be quiet and non-disruptive and so no one bothers with them. It is ridiculous to hear a doctor tell a girl they can't have ASD because it's only found in boys. These professionals need to pick up their books and do some continuing studies.

I think it's pretty messed up as well. If you are aware, insanity used to be the catch all for severe mental instabilities. Then came along schizophrenia. Then subtypes of schizophrenia. Now we know that there are numerous causes of the manifested behavior associated with various types of schizophrenia.

I think our understandings of the human psyche and it's underpinnings is merely in it's infancy, and until we progress much further, we should realize the labels to be but a tool for probing further; a generalization which has the intent of categorizing abnormal behavior, but can't possibly explain away the root causes in full. We're looking at the result, and trying to find the source of this result. We need to be digging deeper into the past links that lead to these results.

reply to post by SpaceJ


Oh I forgot to ask you something. Do you enjoy the feeling of being weighed down? It's incredibly calming for myself. Like, I have serious issues getting to sleep, but if someone lies on my back, I will get to sleep within 30 seconds! Often times when someone pats me on the back or something similar I sort of shutdown like a cat if you touch their neck. I will put my head down, close my eyes, and remain silent for a moment or two and then come back around.

Good thread friend. I'm not sure if I'm autistic, but I definitely have a vastly different way of thinking than most of my peers. I also do not really consider myself part of a group and rejected the group mentality at a very early age. It has always disturbed me to some degree, and groups make me uneasy. After reading about tavistock and group psychology, I feel like that was perhaps intuition. However, I laugh at lots of things, although my sense of humor can be, eh, eccentric at times...
I think autistic people may be more likely to become CTs because they don't accept things they are told, and like you said have a tendency to ask 'why'? Because then they look at the answers to the 'why' themselves. As far as whether conspiracy theorists start crazy, or go crazy, I'd say depends on the situation. Although information overload can lead to short term symptoms of psychological disorders. It also makes one question what is real and what is fiction, leading to derealization-like symptoms. This is disorganized but I'm trying to remember the thread as I type. I am also a very fast reader and pick up key words (hyperlexic). Although the areas I excel at are varied, I'm a more natural writer and abstract thinker than a mathematician, but I enjoy science as well as any subject. In conclusion, I may be abnormal, but who isn't?
Hope you're doing well, and happy holidays!