Yes, learning about Neurodiversity will solve your Problems lmao

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, Joshe said:

Give me more than just the eyes and I can read emotions better than NTs.

Like for example?

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

Like for example?

I can't demonstrate anything or isolate variables - it's the whole gestalt. Eyes, body, words, tone, what they're not saying, history, how the specific situation fits their patterns, what the situation typically motivates, whether the pieces are congruent or incongruent.

Also, the gestalt is just "known". I don't use linear thought to see it - I just see it. This is what makes me very good at poker. I (an autistic) can read people like books, which contradicts the premise of the test. 

The eyes are just one input. The test strips away everything except one narrow input and calls it "reading minds". But real mind-reading is integrating all of it. Someone can score high on that test and still oblivious to what's actually going on with people because they never learned to read the whole picture. 

The test implies that reading eyes = TOM = something autistics lack. I can say from my own experience this is bs. I'm not saying there isn't anything valuable about the test, just that it is wrong on its TOM premise. I'm not an academic so I can't argue much but beyond that.

Edited 1 hour ago by Joshe

[Carl-Richard]

2 minutes ago, Joshe said:

I can't demonstrate anything or isolate variables - it's the whole gestalt. Eyes, body, words, tone, what they're not saying, history, how the specific situation fits their patterns, what the situation typically motivates, whether the pieces are congruent or incongruent.

The eyes are just one input. The test strips away everything except one narrow input and calls it "reading minds". But real mind-reading is integrating all of it. Someone can score high on that test and still oblivious to what's actually going on with people because they never learned to read the whole picture. 

The test implies that reading eyes = TOM = something autistics lack. I can say from my own experience this is bs. I'm not saying there isn't anything valuable about the test, just that it is wrong on its TOM premise. I'm not an academic so I can't argue much but beyond that.

I have experience with autistics giving me a thorough in-depth intellectual account of how people work and how their own mind works, which is theoretically insightful and empirically plausible, but which in practice doesn't apply to themselves at all. The theory doesn't meet the reality as claimed. It might or might not be the case for you, and we can't really test that except through interactions. But that's a concept I believe also applies to autistics; not just a lack of TOM with respect to others but with respect to themselves. Because just like concrete rules and inferences based on those might be inefficient for understand other people's minds, it might be inefficient for understanding your own. But that's essentially gaslighting so take it with a grain of salt.

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

I have experience with autistics giving me a thorough in-depth intellectual account of how people work and how their own mind works, which is theoretically insightful and empirically plausible, but which in practice doesn't apply to themselves at all. The theory doesn't meet the reality as claimed. It might or might not be the case for you, and we can't really test that except through interactions. But that's a concept I believe also applies to autistics; not just a lack of TOM with respect to others but with respect to themselves. Because just like concrete rules and inferences based on those might be inefficient for understand other people's minds, it might be inefficient for understanding your own. But that's essentially gaslighting so take it with a grain of salt.

Just so we're on the same page, ToM is about modeling minds, not automatic emotional resonance. The more accurate your models, the higher the ToM.

It's not uncommon for me to annoy people by addressing their thoughts and emotions before they express them. Those closest to me know they can't hide anything, which makes them uneasy, but they also feel like I'm the one who knows them best, which makes me everyone's closest confidant. This is high ToM.

It works like this: right now, subconsciously, I'm storing this interaction into a map of "Carl" which will be available in the gestalt later. It grows from every interaction. For example, before I posted my AI screenshot, I knew you wouldn't like it. My mind seems to make a point of collecting data on people and that data is somehow used to form very accurate predictions about their state and behavior. 

To some reading this (I know who you are): don't project ego inflation or defensiveness onto me. I'm just explaining how ToM works and letting Carl know I'm not self-deceived regarding my own ToM, and that an autistic person can have very high ToM, which contradicts the idea that the eye test is a good proxy for ToM.

I'm sure autistics lack affective empathy (I know I do), but this doesn't necessarily hamper ToM. 

Edited 21 minutes ago by Joshe