Rudeness (was: Re: OT: Aspergers link)

[Bengt Richter]

On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 20:38:51 -0600, "Chris Gonnerman" <chris.gonnerman at newcenturycomputers.net> wrote:

>Frankly I can't understand why Carl is so vehement about 
>this.  I'm not trying to be a victim; quite the opposite,
IANAP, but perhaps Carl was punished as a child for expressing himself
in some way he perceives to be similar to Aspergers describing
their symptoms and inner experiences, and thus re-experiences
his original pain and becomes angry and exasperated. I.e., why
should you get away with that when he didn't? Perhaps he is one
of you and is repressing recognition of it, with associated pain? ;-)

>discovering that there is a physiological basis for my
>differences has been an amazing relief.
I'm curious why that would be, other than the comfort of
assuming that physiological processes might be more stable
than program bugs ;-) I yam wot I yam, at least today ;-)
>
>Mental illness?  Hardly.  Difference in wiring, or perhaps
>a difference in operating system.  At the least, phase 
>mismatch at the interface port.  Understanding why the
>crufty adaptations I have created over the years (and
>converted into habits; nearly as fast as an instinct
>but lacking in simulation accuracy) don't work so well
>has helped me to fix them.
Fascinating. BTW, I wonder what the effect would be of electing
a US president with some subtle difference in brain function.
<this space intentionally bereft of smiley>.

(Personally I think any mortal in a position with that much power
ought to be treated like a nuclear weapon, and require as many safety
backups to prevent malfunction or misuse. E.g., at least someone from each branch
of congress to turn an ignition key to arm the decision-actuation mechansim
for any really significant decision).
>
>Before I ever learned there is a name for what makes me
>who/what I am, I identified all but one of the classic
>symptoms in myself.  I needed a reliable, honest reference;
>my wife was a great help there... but until she saw that
>there are many like me, it was hard for her to understand
>that I can't easily be other than I am.
You think that's _different_? ;-)
>
>I hate to admit this, but I agree with Carl about 1/2.
>The "Personality Typing" he refers to is just another way
>to say the same thing, but without the implication of
>malfunction.  That's too weak, but "Syndrome" and 
>"Disorder" are rather heavy-handed.  I can't think of a
>good middle ground, though.
We all got dealt a few odd cards, most likely. I'd never
heard of Asperger's Syndrome before this thread.
>
>Carl, why do you feel the need to slap me around for this?
>Call it Asperger's Syndrome, or Disorder, or "autistic
>related disorder," or heck, call it Bob if it makes you
>happy... it's the way I was born, and I can't change it.
>I have to learn to live with it, and I have been for
>thirty-seven years so far.
It's interesting to me, but perhaps frightening to some,
that others experience the world differently. I take it
for granted that it would be so, though I hope there is
enough fundamental commonality to make non-delusional
communication possible ;-)
>
>Chill out, and grow up.  Your disapproval of my opinion
>doesn't excuse your rudeness.  Is there something about
I agree.
>"Personality Typing" that makes it OK?
>
Different strokes for different folks, as the old saying goes.
The world would improve more by s/nasty/nice/g
than s/"abnormal"/"normal"/g IMO. (Too many interesting folks
would be lost with the latter, but I wouldn't miss the nasties much ;-)

Regards,
Bengt Richter