I use rules to understand the world. What framework do you use?

[Nervous Rex]

I have commented before that I think that NTs in society are like native English-speakers - they follow all the rules of English without necessarily knowing what they are. In this analogy, I'm not a native English speaker, so I either need someone to tell me the rules or I need to figure them out myself.

So I have always worked hard to understand the rules of society - rules for home life, marriage, socializing with friends, small talk, humor and seriousness, workplace interactions, etc. Once I am sure I have a rule figured out, I follow it to the best of my ability.

I even try to make sense of people's actions and reactions in terms of game theory, thinking that if I can understand what reward they are seeking then I can understand why they do what they do.

But it recently occurred to me that maybe I only try to understand everything in terms of rules because that's what I'm best at - I do very well in systems that are very rules-based, such as math and programming. Maybe there aren't hard-and-fast rules for everything, but I look for rules because that's the best way I have found to understand society.

What other framework is there? Is there a different model, framework, explanation, or worldview that you use to understand the world around you? What works for you?

 

[Magna]

Interesting way of looking at things. I feel the same way you do in that I feel as though I'm a non-native speaker in a foreign land and have felt that way since childhood. That will never change.

You mention there are rules of society, etc, but the problem I've had is that NTs often don't seem to follow those rules which makes it very difficult for me to understand the world.

People disobey laws all the time. Traffic laws, tax laws, property laws, noise ordinances, safety laws, environmental laws, laws against violence, murder, rape, etc. Laws are rules of society.

People often don't follow rules of etiquette, rules of respecting other people's boundaries, personal space, feelings, respecting people's right to have their own opinions, beliefs, etc.

Actually, today it seems like the norm rather than the exception (acting poorly, disrespectfully, etc).

Do you go along with the norm and act badly and poorly as well? Not me.

I'm not finding it hard to understand the rules of society, I'm finding it hard to understand what the point is when any remnant of objective moral code isn't followed any longer and life has been debased to the subjective (I, Me, Mine). It's very sad and disappointing.

 

[Tom]

Interesting thought. I suppose we all use something. But I haven't really much analyzed that part of how I operate.

I do use rules to a large extent. I like rules. But I think more in a situational way. 'When you go here, you stand in line' etc.

As far as people go I suspect I use a system more based on emotions/feelings. That I am not good at math/computers, etc might be a factor. What I am always looking for is the emotion they are presenting. Is it happy, sad, bored, angry, sarcastic, etc, and then I base my actions on that.

 

[Judge]

I have commented before that I think that NTs in society are like native English-speakers - they follow all the rules of English without necessarily knowing what they are. In this analogy, I'm not a native English speaker, so I either need someone to tell me the rules or I need to figure them out myself.

Excellent analogy. Consequently understanding so many rules taken for granted is no easy task, as you know in the case of English. I didn't really come to see English in terms of its complexities until I studied another language in college.

Made me thankful I wasn't having to learn English as a second language.

That all said, I like to think my ability to identify patterns of speech and behavior may help to understand Neurotypical thought processes better. Though whatever methods I might use with some degree of success, such thought processes will always remain somewhat alien to me. -Just keeping it honest.

 

[Gerald Wilgus]

My general outlook is that the Cosmos is entirely natural and materialistic. That simplifies things for me because it eliminates religion and superstition from my thinking. Then I am very good at observing correlation and understanding whether or not there is any causation underlying what I observe. I rarely fall into the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

All that said, I am very poor at observing social interaction as everything appears quite arbitrary to me. Little infuriates me more than when people talk over me while tolerating somebody else filibustering with some inane nonsense. Very long ago, when I wanted to start dating, I read up on NT body language to understand how I needed to present to show interest and other emotional content and to parse anything directed my way. That helped significantly, but it was not easy for me. Those were the only "rules" I ever bothered learning.

 

[Yeshuasdaughter]

I think it's just advice and guidance my father and grandmother gave me as a child. They were both quiet and gentle and wise, and so humble and friendly.

 

[Neonatal RRT]

I work within a large regional medical center, and can see people at their worst,...and best. The healthcare team I work with are people from all over the world. The families I care for are from all over the world. So many different people, religious, political, racial, LGBTQ, rural, and urban differences,...a regular United Nations of people. That said, I can tell you that people see only the society they live in, so one's personal truths are based upon that society,...but those truths may not be true in another society. Not understanding this can sometimes it lead to conflict. Too often people do not pause to take in perspective and context, then lash out with emotion. The rules of society will vary. As healthcare workers, it's something we are very aware of,...my values may not be the same as someone else's,...it forces one to have these conversations when it comes to making tough life and death decisions.

Now, having said that, I too can get very frustrated and confused with neurotypical behavior patterns in general. I often find myself having to turn off the imaginary emotion switch in my brain in order to do the work that I do, but I've been doing it so long that I've also found it useful to decouple emotions from the things I do and say outside of work. This has it's pros and cons, but as a whole, emotional behavior, to me, seems to be very common with the neurotypical population,...it often seems irrational and sometimes destructive. It's not to say that I haven't lost control of my emotions and said and did some embarrassing and regretful things,...I hate that I cannot seem to modulate my emotions like some others can,...so I push them down deep.

As far as a systems approach to understanding behaviors and societies,...I can't say that I have found one that satisfies all the variables. For even polite , considerate, well-mannered Western behaviors may be seen as "weak", "rude" or even "insulting" to someone from another culture. I find it useful to take pause when I am dealing with certain people,...decouple the emotion switch,...take in their perspective and context as best I can,...then proceed with the interaction.

 

[Nervous Rex]

As far as people go I suspect I use a system more based on emotions/feelings.

I do believe that we - NTs and NDs alike - are driven far more by emotion than by 'logic'. We do whatever we think will lead to us feeling better. I really think that I could predict exactly how a person will react to a situation if I know:
1) How that situation makes the person feel.
2) How that person wants to feel.
3) What actions that person has to choose from.

How right I am is certainly up for debate, but this is my "game theory" approach to understanding people: Understand what their reward is and see what "moves" they can make, or think of to make. Whichever move maximizes their reward is the move they will make.

The reward for most people isn't a 'logical' approach to maximizing income, time, etc. For almost all people, the reward is whatever emotions they want to feel - feeling safe, happy, accomplished, powerful, etc.

 

[Aspychata]

Agree with OP. I view as what is this person's motivation at this moment? This has taken me quite far in my long lifetime. Sometimes l ignore it, kinda gets down to my mood. If you discover the first need, the second need isn't quite as important. I did work in mediation with two distinct types of people, educated professional and the simple layman. And that carried me thru. I had to be supportive to the simple person yet tough and not a pushover to the attorney involved in the complaint.

This is a good post. Thanks for bringing this up. We need to examine social interaction at it's basic level like anthropologists. The ones who master can morp and go anywhere and talk to anyone. The president or the cashier.

I am not sure as l see it as a rule. Social interaction is not tangible, it's sorta intangible. So it's hard to have rules or a system as such. I am guided more by core principles. They are very simple.

 

[Nervous Rex]

You mention there are rules of society, etc, but the problem I've had is that NTs often don't seem to follow those rules which makes it very difficult for me to understand the world.

People disobey laws all the time. Traffic laws, tax laws, property laws, noise ordinances, safety laws, environmental laws, laws against violence, murder, rape, etc. Laws are rules of society.

This is really where my approach breaks down. If everything could be broken down to rules that everyone consistently followed, I'd be a happy man.

So, there are certain rules that govern a lot of interactions (but nowhere near all) - like not butting into a conversation or interrupting someone else. But trying to figure out why someone breaks that rule - is that because the person is rude, or impatient, or what they have to say is more important or urgent, or because they didn't want the other person to finish what they were saying, or because they just don't know the "rules"? Until I know the answer, I don't know if I should call the person out or quietly go along. There are really too many exceptions, or too many people who think they are exceptions.

What usually happens is that I find what I think is a good rule to follow, so I follow it, and somehow I'm left behind, left out, or unable to keep up with the flow of a social interaction, because I'm following a much more rigid system than everyone else is.

 

[Suzette]

I've tried to learn and follow the rules too. This worked very well through elementary school but afterwards, not so much. Just as I think I know what the rules are, someone else comes along and is applauded for breaking the rules.
I have given up on trying to undestand or follow any rules except state and federal law. I mostly just keep my head down and my mouth shut. Above all, I try not to denigrate myself and live accrording to what I value.

I knew a boy in highschool that called me "spooky". I suppose that still fits. I get "into trouble" when I express myself. So I don't. I am happier that way.

I do try to understand others perspectives. I mostly fail at that but it is the one thing I am really good at voicing to others when they are tearing someone else down. "How do you think they feel about that?"

Honestly, I have spent my adult life just muddling though as best I can. I suppose it can be considered a "system" of a sorts.

 

[Fino]

Christianity's got its own system. I think that's part of why it appeals to people. You can accept its doctrines and turn off your brain.

 

[Skittlebisquit]

This is really where my approach breaks down. If everything could be broken down to rules that everyone consistently followed, I'd be a happy man.

So, there are certain rules that govern a lot of interactions (but nowhere near all) - like not butting into a conversation or interrupting someone else. But trying to figure out why someone breaks that rule - is that because the person is rude, or impatient, or what they have to say is more important or urgent, or because they didn't want the other person to finish what they were saying, or because they just don't know the "rules"? Until I know the answer, I don't know if I should call the person out or quietly go along. There are really too many exceptions, or too many people who think they are exceptions.

What usually happens is that I find what I think is a good rule to follow, so I follow it, and somehow I'm left behind, left out, or unable to keep up with the flow of a social interaction, because I'm following a much more rigid system than everyone else is.

So I want to encourage more open and honest dialogue about this topic, I think it's a really important topic. Thank you for raising it. It seems to be at the heart of behavior, why do I choose to behave as I do? If I understand you, you are saying that my choices are based on what makes me feel good. It seems transactional, like gangster stuff. You do something nice for me and I will help you out with your problem that you have.

It seems to rigid somehow. But i cannot put my finger on it, it keeps slipping away.

 

[Gracey]

I can adapt far better when I have a good idea of what 'the rules' are.

Serving in the military - easy. Governed by many rules and included etiquette, protocol, unchanging procedure, tradition, history, rank structure.
In my humble opinion, nothing much changed or was governed by fluctuating emotions. Very black & white.

Similar working in government or local government as a civilian. Not as black & white as the military though.

I compare the above with my now lone/remote working for a small family owned company.
I don't get the chance to interact with colleagues much so can't gauge what the (unspoken) culture/norm/social rules within the company are.
Most all communication is electronic and is either instruction or fact. - Nobody writes 'good morning' or 'goodbye' or asks 'how are you?'

In the absence of (unspoken) social rules or social contact with others,
I only have the company handbook, my own manners and a 'can do' attitude to navigate this particular employment.

Other than work or family, I try to avoid contact with others.
My OCD & anxiety is still down a bit of a rabbit hole with exposure to germs, chiefly covid.
I limit personal contact where I can and find I don't really have to consider what's motivating a persons mood, behaviour or attitude because I don't interact with many, face to face.

 

[Progster]

Christianity's got its own system. I think that's part of why it appeals to people. You can accept its doctrines and turn off your brain.

That last sentence is actually the very reason why religion doesn't appeal to me.

I observe people's behaviour, then try to find patterns and then deduce rules and it works to a certain extent, but humans are way too complex for that. Too many factors, most of which you can't possibly know unless you know the person, their environment, their background and people involved. And you can never know what is going on inside their mind. So I then gather information about a given issue, then try to make a decision or conclusion based on that. Some people are better than others at this, and I'm not one of the better ones. I tend to avoid getting involved with emotional or relationship issues.

 

[SusanLR]

Rather from a scientist's view myself.
Like discovering a new animal species you need to observe actions which are usually based
on psychology, then emotions and understanding why these are based on how the physical
make up creates the behaviour.

It all starts in the DNA and Gene structure. Why people react and do things in certain manners
is built around the material matter. Then personality develops from the psychological and neurological.
Finally you have a human the acts and reacts in their own mannerisms based on these
forces of nature that most do not even understand.
There is also the environment that they were surrounded by which most will follow without
questioning. This falls under cultures and beliefs. Religions, morales, etc.

If one can stay independently detached and just be observers, then the ability to be the trueself
can grow.
I try to go through life with as little allowance for letting other's belief systems on any subject
influence me.

Legal rules and laws are a different matter.
When in Rome, better do as the Romans do. Or risk being thrown to the lions.

 

[Gerald Wilgus]

I can adapt far better when I have a good idea of what 'the rules' are.

Serving in the military - easy. Governed by many rules and included etiquette, protocol, unchanging procedure, tradition, history, rank structure.
In my humble opinion, nothing much changed or was governed by fluctuating emotions. Very black & white.

Similar working in government or local government as a civilian. Not as black & white as the military though.

I compare the above with my now lone/remote working for a small family owned company.
I don't get the chance to interact with colleagues much so can't gauge what the (unspoken) culture/norm/social rules within the company are.
Most all communication is electronic and is either instruction or fact. - Nobody writes 'good morning' or 'goodbye' or asks 'how are you?'

In the absence of (unspoken) social rules or social contact with others,
I only have the company handbook, my own manners and a 'can do' attitude to navigate this particular employment.

Other than work or family, I try to avoid contact with others.
My OCD & anxiety is still down a bit of a rabbit hole with exposure to germs, chiefly covid.
I limit personal contact where I can and find I don't really have to consider what's motivating a persons mood, behaviour or attitude because I don't interact with many, face to face.

I understand quite well what you are saying. My career had revolved around Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations, particularly CFR 21.211 as it pertained to process validation. More recently the FDA incorporated principles of quality engineering into their guidance, which is a strength of mine.

Social "rules" are another matter. I, like @Fino , see how religious rules are used to separate and isolate groups of people. After fighting exclusion in my life I found religious exclusivity to be an existential threat to me. I look upon many social interactions to be like that, used in defining inclusion/exclusion rather than acceptance.

 

[ucrenegade]

The bible ---oops that will get deleted

 

[Nervous Rex]

Christianity's got its own system. I think that's part of why it appeals to people. You can accept its doctrines and turn off your brain.

I think that's an over-generalization. Not all religions are the same.

I happen to belong to one that opposes "turning off your brain" - rather, they encourage individuals to develop their own convictions and always try to grow and improve. I doubt I would have figured out as much as I have about how (I think) the world works if I belonged to a religion that didn't teach a growth mindset.

 

[Gerontius]

Medieval philosophy, reason-based.

Edwardian social mores. The strictly defined social norms are awesome.

Modern science. We know more now than ever before; why not.

Roman Catholicism. I like the fact that it relies on reason & logic as well as faith, so I don't have to play stupid and just kiss up to clerics.

A Social Distributist attitude to economics.

My father's directive: "no matter what, be kind."