Posted by Larry Hoover on August 8, 2003, at 9:24:43
In reply to it's interesting, what's going on in this thread » Ame Sans Vie, posted by Zo on August 8, 2003, at 0:34:29
>
> . . pretty well illustrates the difference between those who come from their emotions, in their manner of speech - and those who more closely examine their actual wording.Your dichotomy is arbitrary.
> Is it not possible, Larry and Ame, to observe that real offence has been taken, and to consider that the analytical only goes so far, when it comes to people's feelings?
If my meaning has been miscontsrued, then I'm going to start there. That doesn't mean that's all I'm doing.
>It is not the scrupulosity with which you justify your own words that troubles me - and I do not mean to single you out, I merely address you both because you are here - and represent a position, a way of thinking, that contributes to many of the misunderstandings I've seen here.
I choose my language scrupulously, most of the time. Returning the focus to the language is not a justification. I don't just restate the same thing. I expand, rephrase, provide context.
The issue for me, in this text only environment, is that all the other aspects of typical verbal communication are totally lacking. I cannot use inflection, volume, eye-contact, body language, etc. I cannot instantly respond to my listener, as I might when I observe that I have been misunderstood. All I've got is words.
> And even more, it represents Bob's thinking, and the reason for the resultant upheavel.<spock eyebrow>
> The moment of difference, I notice, for each of you, is that when you get the response that someone is hurt or angry or offended at what you've posted - Larry, particularly you - you immediately turn to your *own* words.I'm going to address misunderstanding first, if it is apparent in any interaction. If I'm clearly understood, then I address the emotive response directly. In other words, I'll gladly be responsible for what I meant, but not for what someone mistakenly thought I meant.
You have a limited data set upon which to base your assumptions about me.
Just because I do not wear my heart on my sleeve, in this environment, does not mean that you can assess my emotive interactions fairly.
> Instead of turning *towards* your fellow board member who is upset with you, to mend things with them - you turn to your own words, reread them,>find nothing wrong -
Excuse me? Don't presume to know what I think. Pointing out what I meant is not equivalent to finding nothing wrong.
>and put the other person, who has told you of their feelings, at an further remove.
Inevitable, in a misunderstanding.
I would hope for reconsideration.
> Follow me, here. In the world of Aspergers, the rest of us are called NTs. For neurotypical. And it is granted, by all, that NTs feel the general social run of things. Whether one approves or not, we are the norm. Whether it is fair or not - and I didn't invent this stuff - society and psychology are rife with judgement upon those who do not readily, or easily, "connect" to others. OR - and this is an important or - readily "get" the tone of things, that others are getting.
>
> To NTs, turning away from the feelings brought before you - is an offense. It is the equivalent of saying, I do not care about your feelings.Ya. So if the feelings are implicit (could you not feel the passion in *my* words?), they deserve no consideration?
> So that when you comb over your post, instead of really listening to the *person* and their complaints, it unfortunately broadcasts a message I'm not sure you intend.You created an artificial and arbitrary dichotomy of Asperger v. neurotypicals. The whole point behind my two posts (the ones very early on in this thread) is that the presumption that silence is equivalent to a lack of emotive response is erroneous. It takes me time, according to rules which make perfect sense to a victim of violence, to approach the emotive content of a dialogue. First, one must make sure one is understood.
Your comments are naive.
> Then, let us say the NT gets further upset at being cold-shouldered, and the analytical type is even more mystified,**why the big deal** (emphasis added)
That's not what's going on at all. Violence is usually projected; it has little or nothing to do with the target. I'm looking for validation of the link between the emotion and my words.
> examines his post even more - and withdraws even more from the person who wanted and needed his presence.
>
> Awareness. That's all. These are different modes of being and of communicating - and they're horribly misread, as in this thread.Absolutely true. And, by you, as well.
>Two different languages.
There are more than two.
>I've had experience in both camps, and feel for everybody, and would dearly love this to stop.
Walk a mile in my shoes.
> Ame, Lar, it gives offense to justify yourself when another is hurting. It just does. Pax, Zen, Larry is turning to *his* skill set. Beneath our different tool kits, we all want the same thing - the love and caring of one another. Even if the opposite style from yours - all of you - pisses you off, I don't care. It's all a MISUNDERSTANDING.My point, from the beginning.
> And Larry, unfortunate but I'm sure you know, true, the more analytic types are outvoted. Society has already ruled, to listen is to demonstrate caring and respect. That's what is important. Not that your post be impeccable and well-defended. There is much to be said about adjustments from all sides, but for now, the burden is with you.It's with everybody.
>Hey, my Dad was a physicist, he was the same way, I loved my Dad. That is quite apart from the fact *he* had to learn how to go along with common social behaviors. If he wanted to be liked and accepted, which he achieved.
You have no idea how much work it has required for me to get this far. It has nothing whatsoever to do with being analytical.
> Bob is not "the bad guy" here. He *is* the guy who regularly alienates and has driven away some of the most brilliant minds I've ever known. An unfortunate part of Aspergers is the inability to consider, to really in your heart consider, the other person's position. It's a neurological disability - that can be changed.As can emotional responses to misunderstandings.
> Many thoughts. I hope some prove useful.
>
>
>
> ZoI hope you give fair consideration to reassessing your assumptions, in light of the new information I've provided.
Lar
poster:Larry Hoover
thread:248064
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20030808/msgs/249266.html