Generics: further reading

[31770]

Hi folks,

 

Hmmm, better start with some obligatory first post information.

 

I'm 24 and have known for a mere month that I have Asperger's. It seems that I would have known sooner had I not obsessed over mimicing generic behavioural responses to average social interactions throughtout late childhood/teens(/=&, not proceeding divisor). That said it may be more accurately attributed to poor introspective factoring on my part, or the fact that I'm not a doctor.

 

Anyway; I've been scrapping the internet for information on the social impairment and have found many useful generalised information sources(albeit articles predominently pertain to childhood ASDs) however there are several subjects which I desire to be considerably better acquainted with amd I'm hoping other forum users may be able to point me in the right direction. At the moment the topics in question are:

 

- Default thought pattern (passive subsection of Primary Interests)

In short the feeling that regardless of what you're thinking about at any giving time, even if consciously there are no thoughts regarding a primary interest, is still present in the background. Sort of like a computer is always monitoring it's audio device drivers whether or not they are in use (perhaps not the best simile...)

- Recursive analysis and solving the unsolvable)

Difficult to explain, say you send an email and then you realise that a statement may be perceived as something other than the intended meaning to which you have to explain in another email what the intent was. Of course now the new email needs further clarification, with the loop continuing.

Part two of this item in this list of topics in which I'd like to better understand. For anyone who has seen Mozart and the whale (I watched it on the 17th prior to an appointment on the 18th with the doctor as a source of common relatability between the doctor and I. Turns out she hadn't seen the film, but it was still useful to me) where the male lead has the dilemma whereupon he has been instructed by the female lead's doctor not to contact her (the lead) by her request as weel as the doctor's. This causes the male lead the dilemma where in order to not make contact he has to make contact to inform the female lead that he won't be won't make contact. I can't think of a better way to describe this but information on how an ASD mind works with a taking no action is still an action, and more importantly others involved need to have the information available to them in order for such an action to be initiated successfully.

- Not a direct topic as such but information on how to explain to people that have known you for most of their life that despite the fact that they are accustomed to your quirks and as such regard them as negligible and that they know you don't have an ASD. To put in a slightly less flattering way: how do you explain that when they say "You analyse stuff too much" that they literally have no idea how much of the thought process has been filtered prior to being verbalised in order to make the topic at least mildly accessible to them(By accessible I don't mean they're too stupid to understand it's just difficult to trim information to a level that does stress courtesy(averaging three change of topic requests from third parties, excluding preprocessed topics obviously)). Essentially just because they only receive or facilitate for a truly insignificant amount of any of my thought processes (idling or topic reactive) doesn't mean that they can lay claim to any empathic understanding of a person's conscious existence.

 

Erm I'll stop here for now so I don't use all the forum's database storage space with this post. Any information on the above subjects would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for taking the time to read this or at least for spotting this thank you at the bottom of the post while looking for a synopsis.

 

EDIT:

Section starting "Not a direct topic..."

I'm not pointing any fingers or blaming others for my failures here although it may seem that way. I accept that I should have tried to be more gregarious with the manner in which I interact with the people close to me and realise that they're stubbornness on the subject is entirely my fault for not openly discussing topics such as thought patterns but I adapt my persona based on statistics and if 99 people don't respond well to an action carried out by myself I'll go ou7t my way to not take that action again. To be honest I can't express what I'm getting at here, would these people be close if I'd been unfiltered? I didn't know anything about ASDs until recently so could I have known that I should have explained how my mind works to people. How can you try to explain something about yourself when detail is paramount to you but excessive self-referencing is condisered fishing for sympathy, how much is too much information what is an acceptable amount. I can't rap this up neatly hopefully someone here can make sense of the edit. In short I'm not trying to insult others for accepting me.

 

<edit title removed, little to no value> I hope the post reads ok if the way it is written is out of order, not suitable or anything not listed in the prior two please let me know in what way it has offended or caused you to view it in the manner which is relevant to this edit. Sorry in advance.

Edited May 21, 2011 by 31770

[Sally44]

I'd like to answer, but i'm afraid I don't really understand what information you are wanting?

 

Are you talking about obsessive thoughts?

 

And Mimicing to attempt to blend in?

[31770]

I'd like to answer, but i'm afraid I don't really understand what information you are wanting?

 

Are you talking about obsessive thoughts?

 

And Mimicing to attempt to blend in?

 

Mimicing was perhaps not the best choice of word. Studying how others react to situations and using that as a framework for similar situations when they present themselves.

 

I'd say more relating to primary fields of interest although they're technically obsessive thoughts. The default could be better described as a constant chain of thought that is always present, even when you're not consciously thinking about the subject you can still feel the chain of thoughts dominating your passive cognitive processing as a constant.

[darkshine]

Your use of language is blowing my mind

 

I'm not sure if this is the kind of thing your after?

 

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0004867

 

check out the references for other articles

 

Have you tried Google Scholar?

[Sally44]

There was some studies or research done on mirror image cells. Maybe someone has the link to that?

 

What I find with my own son, is that the information others receive and process easily and integrate and connect it and respond to it automatically without thought - is not an option for him.

 

He monoprocesses and information is fragmented and not processed and not connected. So he often does not have the full picture and therefore has no chance of reaching the same conclusion as other "NT" children because he hasn't recieved the same "core information".

 

And I think that IF it is not happening automatically, that the person can then become every vigilant, and that will cause anxiety, stress and overloading.