Re: PTD was the most-respected of the AUE regulars ...

On Mon, 29 Jul 2024 08:16:56 +0100, Hibou
<vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

Le 28/07/2024 à 20:10, Rich Ulrich a écrit :

On Sun, 28 Jul 2024 14:57:29 +0100, Hibou wrote:

>
Yes, I don't think it's peculiar to Asperger's or autism. People often
adopt positions without exploring them thoroughly, commit themselves,
and then feel obliged to defend that commitment, even when it turns out
they're wrong.
>
It's not easy to admit one is wrong, but it has its advantages. It
brings discussion to a halt, instead of prolonging it embarrassingly,
and one gains Brownie points for valuing the truth.

 
Consider this combination:  Asserting something that is not true
is LYING.  LYING is very bad, like, a bad sin. So one is careful
in what one asserts.  And one does not want to admit to the
sin of being wrong. This creates a certain internal conflict,
because there is also the notion that a 'sin' should be something
that was intentional; and the original mis-statement is not
something that one regrets.

>
In Usenet forums, I don't think deliberate lying is much of a problem,
but people are often mistaken. It's hard to admit that one is in error;
it throws doubt on one's ability. Also, our beliefs are part of who we
are; to let one go is to lose part of oneself.

You are still missing the idea that autistics often 'relate
differently' to the idea of truth vs. falsehood; 'innocent mistake' is
not in their working vocabulary.

I don't know how much of their problem is created or influenced
by the aftermath of their own social ineptness -- a feature
have not been discussing. The Usenet autism group once posted
a note by a woman who said that her child's kindergarten teacher
praised the daughter for her 'maturity' since she never joined in
when kids were bullying or hassling. The teacher did not
recognize that the daughter was not mature, she simply did not
UNDERSTAND why the  bullying was taking place; she did not
join in automatically, because she did not fit in.

Aspies are not insulted by the same things neurotypicals
consider insulting, so they make social mistakes. They get called
Stupid or Liar when they claim they did not UNDERSTAND that
someone would (or would not) be offended by something.
" - Okay, you insulted my shirt.  My mama picked it out, not me. 
Why should I be offended?"  Or the Aspie might insult a shirt,
while imagining they were offering a trivial observation.

>

Bill (stats-resident Aspie) would justify his (very rare) backing
down by asserting that there are two different 'cases' and he
was thinking of the other (and more important, somehow) one.

>
Well, numerous authors - Overstreet and Carnegie, for instance - have
written of how reluctant people are to change their minds - and not just
autistic people. I expect all salesmen can tell tales about that (Dale
Carnegie was one, of course).

I think I made a break-through, long ago, in taking hostile words
seriously--  when I recognized that I could take the argument one
step further if I ADMITTED the first accusation.  So, I started
paying more attention (how true IS it?) and parsing the meaning. 

Yesterday, my Face Book feed included a page from Project
2025 -- That is the 900 page outline that the Heritage Foundation
prepared, for implementing Trump's authoritarion revision of
government. It has received enough bad press that Trump tries
to disown it. (In addition to it using his words, his VP choice,
Vance, was fairly intimately involved.)

A section on health care intended to provide a conspiratorial
line about how terrible the CDC and other experts performed. But
it wrote in generalites [CROSS-THREAD ALERT] instead of listing
their (lame) complaints.  I read it, thought about it, and commented
that I could AGREE with those generalities -- TRUMP, a central
political figure, interfered with the bureaucracies that would have
performed better without him. 

--
Rich Ulrich