I can't agree that labels will eventually define us. Perhaps a child may well be influenced by labels, but once past a certain point in our development I don't believe labels have that much power. Otherwise, all of those 'positive thinking your way to success' schemes would be working like crazy.
-
Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
- Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral
I am very curious about certain personality parameters and how they apply to the Autistic
- Thread starter Oldlady
- Start date
The labels are used to identify others, most think it doesn't apply to them.
So others, in whatever group of gossip, define us.
Often ASD folk don't engage in this ,so are labelled in absentia.
The standard habit for most people is to define everything.
Accuracy isn't needed, just a time saver for everyday use.
My thought is what everyone thinks is mostly wrong.
Others define us, but we don't define ourselves because we don't label ourselves, just each other?
So whatever label I am given by others is the one which I will believe, and whatever label I give others is the one which they will believe? But, I can't label myself? I am utterly defined by what others say about me?
This gets confusing. . too many Wes,us etc.
Labelling can be a social exercise - think reputation.
Personally, I don't care,so don't have input or am aware of my label
( I can guess)
Social labelling, the label you are given is the one you will defend or reject, depending if it's negative or not.
If you're socially orientated.
You are defined completely by others if you are outside of the social group.
Applying labels to yourself can be useful..
Maybe
What I have been trying, clumsily, to say is:
We shorthand things, to remember them.
The shorthand never gives the full picture.
Only a generalized one.
Over time, we remember the shorthand, but unless we look deeper, the nuances and peculiarities are lost to us.
When we relate it to others, we use the shorthand, and reduce our description.
This creates confusion and ambiguity.
"Negative Nancy agreed to lunch?
With Biff?
I never would have thought..."
Words create expectations.
Some of the most brash, brusque, insensitive, shock-value loving people I have ever met frequently say of themselves:
"I calls 'em like I sees 'em!"
---
The more strongly that we identify with a word, the more strongly we will attempt to identify with that word or words.
Admittedly, this tendency, or lack thereof, is linked to a person's constitution.
I have witnessed transformations in people that induce fear, in me.
"I hate __________s!
I'll kill him(sic) if I meet one!"
The person recieved "favorable" response(s) from the bold, firmly stated position.
They continued to repeat it, for just this reason.
They continue to repeat it to cement the "favorable" response to their persona.
Eventually, they meet a ___________.
They are immediately in a cage created by their words.
This otherwise passive, non-aggressive person--- will now do violence--- because he promised to.
Annnndd...
Often, those that encouraged the proclamations--- will condone the action, creating a feedback loop.
We can trap ourselves, by our words, akin to nets.
---
Thats not to say that Fridge isn't right.
We most certainly can benefit from labels, as well.
The trick is to know what we seek to gain by the label, and careful application.
The trick is also to know when to move on from the label, when we have grown beyond it.
If I am not, and wish to be kind, I can repeat: "I am kind.", or, "I will be kind.", prior to any thought, speech, or action, and it will serve as a reminder of the way that I wish to be, goading, guiding me to that reality.
An extension of
"If you want to be it, act it."
"If you want to act it, say it."
---
Words are important.
They should be used specifically and carefully and guardedly;
they can have power, both for the unwary, or for the adept.
As always, intent is everything.
Yes you can, and yes, "it" does.
I quoted "it", because "Positive" is subjective, but generally agreed upon as an affect, effect, or result.
Is it a "positive" to become a far more ruthless and effective stock-broker?
---
I'd tend to think it the opposite of confirmation bias.
In this instance it is being used as a catalyst for change--- where one seeks to change discovered or realized, pre-existent bias.
And IF, it is being done consciously.
"Conscious", and "intent", and "consistency" being the controlling factors.
They are flip-sides of the same coin---
The difference is intent.
Without intending anything, one can unintentionally create predisposition by haphazardly repeating something.
Results will likely not have been considered.
By intent, a very specific response can be precipitated by affirmation.
Results are often anticipated and exact.
The "third" side, of this particular coin, is confirmation bias--- intentional or otherwise--- finding comfort in a position and reinforcing both the comfort and the position. Results can be unanticipated and inexact. They can lead people to unexpected extremes, from which it is difficult to backpedal.
When no path is chosen, or it is chosen flippantly or arbitrarily, or without awareness, the result can be
horrifying.
Control.
What we say, is more than "just words".
It is wise to practice mindfulness,
in all that we do.
Yes - cultural memes. Most people talk and communicate in these memes all the time. A word is never just a word - it is an idea, an unspoken implication and an emotion.
"To say the least, if not less."
(Nyuck, nyuck, nyuck.)
Shortly before reading this thread, I read the thread in which one person said to another that what they said did not sound "aspie-like". They didn't like that. Your expectation based on the label resulted in surprise when the expectation was subverted. It seems to imply that your perception of the conversation was colored all along by the label.
On another, closely related (I think) note, one way I've always gotten myself to do something I want to do is by telling people I do it, even if I don't.
For example, if I want to make sure I read every day, if it ever comes up, I say, "Oh, I read every day!" And if I keep saying it, I will feel guilty about lying and feel pressured to read every day.
Then ya do it for exercise, eating healthy...all the lame stuff that people will look at you in awe when you lie and say you do it.
And as I begin to do it, I tell myself time isn't linear and so I never really lied at all.
On another, closely related (I think) note, one way I've always gotten myself to do something I want to do is by telling people I do it, even if I don't.
For example, if I want to make sure I read every day, if it ever comes up, I say, "Oh, I read every day!
" And if I keep saying it, I will feel guilty about lying and feel pressured to read every day. Then ya do it for exercise, eating healthy...all the lame stuff that people will look at you in awe when you lie and say you do it.
And as I begin to do it, I tell myself time isn't linear and so I never really lied at all.
JDShredds
Well-Known Member
Let me start with this: Personality typology and Jungian psychoanalysis (the root of Myers-Briggs) are special interests of mine. If anyone wanted to have an in depth conversation on the topic, I would dive right in.
But to get to the point, my personality profile is as such:
Myers-Briggs Type: INTJ
Big 5 Traits: Openness Very High, Conscientiousness Very High, Extraversion Low, Agreeableness Low, Neuroticism High.
So, in short, to answer the OP's question: I'm an introverted, disagreeable thinker.
And now for the tangent:
Myers-Briggs is more of a derivative - a theory of a theory - based on Carl Jung's "types" based on the 8 cognitive functions he defined (broken into 4 perceiving functions and 4 judging functions). This was a theory he developed from his brilliant, though somewhat subjective, observations as a practicing psychologist. But to be fair, people ARE subjective, and an incredibly brilliant and intuitive mind like Jung may be just as valuable as more objective, data driven measures.
Big 5 is essentially the most objective and widely used personality measure in modern psychology, focusing more on the end result of how your personality manifests in life, and is measured on 5 linear scales/gradients.
If you're not familiar with Big 5, here are the traits in a nutshell (there may be a better way to describe them, as I'm not referencing any sources other than my memory, but it is a special interest, so...):
- Openness To Experience: The creativity/intellect/curiosity dimension. High association with IQ and interest in the arts and abstract ideas. Tendency toward liberalism and no boundaries.
- Conscientiousness: Structure/Order/Industrious dimension. Highly associated with hard work, organization, conservationism, and disgust sensitivity. Likes lines, walls, boundaries, predictability, cleanliness.
- Extraversion: Positive emotion and assertiveness dimension. Highly associated with social seeking, verbal skill, gregariousness, "outward" world view and positive attitude. Highly extraverted people are energized by social contact and busy environments and fatigued by quiet and solitude; highly introverted people are energized by quiet and solitude and fatigued by social contact and busy environments. This gives wiggle room for "ambiverts" that fall somewhere in the middle.
- Agreeableness: As a disagreaable person myself, this is what I like to call "the social conformist" dimension. This measures how much you try to appease others and make them comforted. Agreeableness desires avoidance of conflict and is associated with the maternal/paternal and caretaking instincts as well as social harmony (in contrast with valuing truth, fact and effectiveness above the feelings of others).
- Neuroticism: Negative emotion dimension. How prone you are to being wired to respond with fear, worry, anxiety. Highly associated with negative worst-case-scenario thinking, prone to depression, anxiety, etc (as opposed to those that aren't so sensitive to worry and think things "will work out fine.") A positive side of neuroticism is preparedness and being first to alert to red flags and warning signs.
High scores in a trait are fairly self-explanatory. Less of a trait means you have a tendency toward the opposite of the given trait (If you're less open, you're more likely to be closed minded and lack curiosity; less conscientious means you may not be very orderly or tidy, may be more "relaxed" and less structured; less extraversion means you're more introverted; less agreeable means more disagreeable, less neurotic means more emotionally stable). The gradient gives the flexibility to account for all people and all personalities without any of the "one" or "the other" with many other typology measures.
For what its worth, I happen to have no traits in middle of the pack. I'm a fairly extreme personalty overall.
::catches breath::
But to get to the point, my personality profile is as such:
Myers-Briggs Type: INTJ
Big 5 Traits: Openness Very High, Conscientiousness Very High, Extraversion Low, Agreeableness Low, Neuroticism High.
So, in short, to answer the OP's question: I'm an introverted, disagreeable thinker.
And now for the tangent:
Myers-Briggs is more of a derivative - a theory of a theory - based on Carl Jung's "types" based on the 8 cognitive functions he defined (broken into 4 perceiving functions and 4 judging functions). This was a theory he developed from his brilliant, though somewhat subjective, observations as a practicing psychologist. But to be fair, people ARE subjective, and an incredibly brilliant and intuitive mind like Jung may be just as valuable as more objective, data driven measures.
Big 5 is essentially the most objective and widely used personality measure in modern psychology, focusing more on the end result of how your personality manifests in life, and is measured on 5 linear scales/gradients.
If you're not familiar with Big 5, here are the traits in a nutshell (there may be a better way to describe them, as I'm not referencing any sources other than my memory, but it is a special interest, so...):
- Openness To Experience: The creativity/intellect/curiosity dimension. High association with IQ and interest in the arts and abstract ideas. Tendency toward liberalism and no boundaries.
- Conscientiousness: Structure/Order/Industrious dimension. Highly associated with hard work, organization, conservationism, and disgust sensitivity. Likes lines, walls, boundaries, predictability, cleanliness.
- Extraversion: Positive emotion and assertiveness dimension. Highly associated with social seeking, verbal skill, gregariousness, "outward" world view and positive attitude. Highly extraverted people are energized by social contact and busy environments and fatigued by quiet and solitude; highly introverted people are energized by quiet and solitude and fatigued by social contact and busy environments. This gives wiggle room for "ambiverts" that fall somewhere in the middle.
- Agreeableness: As a disagreaable person myself, this is what I like to call "the social conformist" dimension. This measures how much you try to appease others and make them comforted. Agreeableness desires avoidance of conflict and is associated with the maternal/paternal and caretaking instincts as well as social harmony (in contrast with valuing truth, fact and effectiveness above the feelings of others).
- Neuroticism: Negative emotion dimension. How prone you are to being wired to respond with fear, worry, anxiety. Highly associated with negative worst-case-scenario thinking, prone to depression, anxiety, etc (as opposed to those that aren't so sensitive to worry and think things "will work out fine.") A positive side of neuroticism is preparedness and being first to alert to red flags and warning signs.
High scores in a trait are fairly self-explanatory. Less of a trait means you have a tendency toward the opposite of the given trait (If you're less open, you're more likely to be closed minded and lack curiosity; less conscientious means you may not be very orderly or tidy, may be more "relaxed" and less structured; less extraversion means you're more introverted; less agreeable means more disagreeable, less neurotic means more emotionally stable). The gradient gives the flexibility to account for all people and all personalities without any of the "one" or "the other" with many other typology measures.
For what its worth, I happen to have no traits in middle of the pack. I'm a fairly extreme personalty overall.
::catches breath::
Why would you be in trouble?
It's a typed error that doesn't even make sense. Hefty does?
Hefty does what? Hefty does Dallas? Cat fows?
doe---female deerWhy would you be in trouble?
It's a typed error that doesn't even make sense. Hefty does?
Hefty does what? Hefty does Dallas? Cat fows?
hefty does~~~fat cows
cat fows was a poorly constructed spoonerism in Fridge's "honor"..
Jokes, probably in poor taste.
My apologies.
Last edited:
Shortly before reading this thread, I read the thread in which one person said to another that what they said did not sound "aspie-like". They didn't like that. Your expectation based on the label resulted in surprise when the expectation was subverted. It seems to imply that your perception of the conversation was colored all along by the label.
On another, closely related (I think) note, one way I've always gotten myself to do something I want to do is by telling people I do it, even if I don't.
For example, if I want to make sure I read every day, if it ever comes up, I say, "Oh, I read every day!
Then ya do it for exercise, eating healthy...all the lame stuff that people will look at you in awe when you lie and say you do it.
And as I begin to do it, I tell myself time isn't linear and so I never really lied at all.
The best predictor of the future is the past, but time is really just a construct.
I would love an in depth discussion about personality theory, but I am not as knowledgeable as you on the subject.
I score similarly on the big five test and am an INTP.
I think I've been misspelling extraversion.
New Threads
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Do we have way more computer power than we need?- Started by MildredHubble
- Replies: 38
-
-
Doing exactly the opposite thing of what your telling yourself not to
- Started by thejuice
- Replies: 10
-
