Monotropism, Me, And My Mind: How I Process Things

My mind is like this: it's not that I process things more slowly than anyone else (if anything I suspect it's significantly faster), but what I do is process them far more deeply. It might be compared to running a model on a computer -- the more detailed the model, the more accurate the output will be, but you will pay for it in having to wait far longer for the model to run. When my mind has grabbed hold of something, it will not let go of it until it has digested it and understood it.

There is a model of autism called monotropism that holds that the autistic brain focuses on fewer things at any one time than a neurotypical brain does. This is the only model I have come across that accurately describes how I experience what is called "autism" (truthfully, I'm not sure it exists in any meaningful sense, rather than being a collection of disparate traits thrown together by clueless psychologists). I find it a great shame that it isn't given much attention, with people instead promoting ridiculous ideas such as Baron-Cohen's (he has done me much harm; may the Lord reward him according to his works) "extreme male brain/empathising-systemising" theory. Had it been mainstream when I was growing up, I feel I would have benefited a lot from the insight into my own mind, where my strengths and potential pitfalls lie. Instead, I had to deal with people, who make the incredibly offense and untrue claim that I lack the ability to understand that other people are people, being feted as "experts"...

So, what is it like when I'm getting to grips with something? What does this extra processing involve? For me, it's that I turn everything over. I can't grab one potential interpretation and run with it, I have to view it from all angles and all possible lenses to gain a full understanding. To grok it. Grabbing the trunk of an elephant isn't enough for me, I need to feel my way along its entire body so as to know truly how it is shaped. To switch between ways of thinking to find the one most appropriate to understand an aspect of it.

This, of course, takes time. The cost of having a more accurate model of reality is that it takes me a lot longer to run through the OODA loop. I suspect this is a big part of my introversion -- the conversations of large groups move far too quickly to process what has been said before we're talking about something else, and my need to understand makes me favour a small number of deep relationships over a large number of shallow ones. I want to truly understand the other person, how they think and how they feel and what they like and what they fear; this means that I have to devote far more cognitive resources to the relationship than a casual "friendship" requires.

This has been present in me from early childhood. I would become obsessed with something, and would not be able to drop it until my mind has finished with it. Dolphins, otters, dragons, sea colonisation, space colonisation... this tendency to obsession is still present in me today, though having gained a far broader range of interests (I find almost everything fascinating, and have cycled through a great many topics) helps somewhat with being able to switch to something more appropriate at the moment I am in, and I can with a small amount of difficulty shift my mind on to a different track. It is a blessing, but as with everything in life it comes with a tradeoff.

So if you see me posting monomanically on a subject, this is probably what is happening: I have found something to chew on and will chew on it till it becomes unchewable.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Fae/acc Manifesto

It is a popular passtime of humans, since the advent of mass literacy, to write manifestos, calls to action, and the like. Especially in the age of the internet, when your potential audience is measured in the billions. And especially if you believe you have Something Important To Say, That Will Change The World. Your mileage may vary on whether or not this manifesto falls into that category; for the most part it is a collection and ordering of various streams of thought, partly inspired by and reacting to the plethora of “[x]/acc” manifestos and micromovements, about where humanity stands and should stand in the universe. Remember that acceleration is not always a change in speed; it can also be a change in direction… 1. A sufficiently complex process is indistinguishable from a person “ I propose to consider the question, "Can machines think?" This should begin with definitions of the meaning of the terms "machine" and "think."… ...Instea...
Read more

The ASHRAE Ventilation Recommendations Are Too Low

With winter on its way, I've been thinking a lot about heating and insulation -- specifically, about what the minimum level of power required is given the need to heat up outside air in a properly ventilated home. This led me to the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, who provide guidance as to what the outside airflow rate should be to ensure acceptable air quality. Unfortunately, having done the maths regarding CO2 production, their recommendations are far too low. Healthy individuals take 12-20 breaths per minute. Each breath exhales 0.5 litres of air , so each person will exhale 6-10 litres every minute, which at a CO2 level of 4%, contains 100 times the CO2 of ambient air. In order to dilute this to a doubling of CO2 over ambient, around 800ppm, 600-1000 L (10-17 L/s) of outside air would be required, assuming the inhabitants are not engaged in physical activity that would raise their CO2 production significantly. The recommendations f...
Read more

The Subtle Future

Everyone knows about the Monofuture , even if they do not know it by that name. It is The Future (tm)! Flying cars! Monorails! Shiny glass and steel towers! Spaceships and spandex, all in the wondrous future of the year 2000AD! And everyone knows that it's not the future we got by the year 2000AD. This has made a few people very disappointed, and many people flustered, because it was the only somewhat-positive vision of the future they have been given. It's Star Trek or Mad Max, and if you look around you you will not see Star Trek, therefore we must be in the Mad Max timeline. But look around more. Just, look around you. Have you worked out what we're looking for? In 50 years of progress, what has fundamentally changed? The cars look a bit different, yes, but they are still cars. Even if autonomous and electric they will still be cars. The railways that carry much of the worlds freight would be instantly recognisable to Brunel. Airlines hit their top speed and took their...
Read more