The purpose(s) of talking...

[DogwoodTree]

Tony Attwood, in his book The Complete Guide to Asperger's Syndrome, says on pg 208, "I have the impression that many people with Asperger's syndrome consider a conversation to be primarily an opportunity to exchange information, to learn or inform, and if there is no practical information to exchange, why waste time talking?"

This is completely accurate for me. I do recognize that helpful information on another person's mood can be transmitted by a small amount of conversation. But even that--conversation, for me, exists for the purpose of exchanging information. I don't really "get" what other purpose there could be.

I see the signs that NTs engage in conversation for the sheer pleasure of it, and they do, in fact, seem to enjoy it. But I don't experience that at all, unless the information being transmitted is interesting to me. What am I missing? I read that statement in Attwood's book and I'm like, "Well duh. Why else would people bother with talking?"

In that same chapter, he talks about various social skills that aspies need to learn to be successful conversationalists. But dang...all those rules and concepts, all of which has to be processed at a cognitive level. It's so much work!! I can perform a lot of it fairly well, but it's certainly not enjoyable. Compliments, entertainment, sympathy, proximity...conversation is not satisfying for me in any of these areas.

 

[unsurewhattoname]

I imagine liking conversation is like me liking information. It's just something extroverts enjoy, even without purpose. There is no purpose to all the data I gather either, but I enjoy it. There's no purpose to making chat with someone, but a lot of people like it and enjoy the company of other people. Like watching TV, that has no purpose either, but it's enjoyment. People all find enjoyment in different things, for some talking is. More likely found in NTs, but of course not every NT enjoys talking and not every ASD doesn't enjoy it.

 

[karen70]

This I think is one of the main reasons that I enjoyed studying the person centred therapy in college.

It taught us how to listen. Something I have always found difficult. Don't get me wrong, my head would feel like it would explode. But in 'learning' how to 'empathise' instead of 'sympathise', and listen in order to be congruent (aware of our own truth, while accepting the other person as an individual in their own right) it actually benefitted me in the sense that I didn't 'need' to talk.

It taught me that I could learn to understand others without giving myself away. A total opposite of how i'd lived.

In me being quiet, I am noticing so so much about people. I seem to get little gift as well, syncronisations and stuff which makes me smile

 

[ancusmitis]

Tony Attwood, in his book The Complete Guide to Asperger's Syndrome, says on pg 208, "I have the impression that many people with Asperger's syndrome consider a conversation to be primarily an opportunity to exchange information, to learn or inform, and if there is no practical information to exchange, why waste time talking?"

This is me as well. I have a hard time contacting people even if I miss them because I can't think of things to say. I feel like I've lost a lot of friends this way.

 

[Jonathan Lees]

sounds very familiar to me, i don't enjoy conversation normally, and i can find it difficult to think of anything to say if there is no pertinent information to share.

 

[Dr. Smart]

I am kind of the opposite, I talk way too much and sometimes have trouble keeping to one subject, or giving the other person a chance to talk.

 

[Pondering]

Conversation is a form of bonding when with a familiar person. Everyone has social needs, acknowledged or not. It usually deepens a relationship, is an opportunity to get to know someone better and maintain the friendship/relationship. A chance to see deeper into a person and/or learn their concerns. Conversation isn't supposed to be one-sided. Both persons should benefit, not always on a noticable level. It is a very social activity and a learned skill at the same time. It is about being a good listener and expressing thoughts into words. It is an interchange of encouragement, a chance to express thoughts. Not just information. There is something extraordinary about being able to have a comfortable conversation with a person. The thing about conversation is that it is not just words. It's also about what isn't said in a conversation that speaks the loudest. It is can be simple or it can be complex. It isn't a math equation that you can just dissect. It flows, it's personal, and a powerful tool in expressing interest in other people.

 

[Jimbo]

Yep. I can relate. I could never understand how to yuck it up with a group of good ole boys. I don't have a clue how they know what to say.

If its not useful information, why talk.

 

[Beverly]

I agree with Mr. Attwood. Yes I know that conversation is also to connect, to make an impression, to share a story, to be friendly, to compliment or insult, to agree or argue, to debate, etc... and, I know how to do it all. 90% of it is pointless blabber mouthing and, I don't like doing it but, it is possible for many of us to learn the art of social conversation quite well.

I can discuss anything, or talk and discuss nothing at all for hours if need be, it's tiring and annoying but, hey, keep smiling and the NTs will never know how pointless, long winded and, annoying you find all of their yammering.

Sure, it's cool to jabber about something exciting to you and, I get it when people do that. I can even understand someone pontificating about their views on a social issue or, gossiping about a celebrity. Now hammering on about the weather, slapping your lips together about the color of the carpet or, running your yap over the pattern of the china is pointless to me.

And, all of the terms, slang and otherwise, humans have for talking pretty well sums up how silly and yet crucial it is to most of them.

 

[NothingToSeeHere]

haha when I read that sentence in the Complete Guide my thought was " well obviously..." I was genuinely confused about why people would talk otherwise. While I am completely aware that different people enjoy different things (obviously) I personally have never identified any other benefit to conversation, most of the time it's just a following a vague script in order to fill social expectations.

Even the passing on information bit is often beyond me as I don't know why anyone would care about most of the things I could say. My family have learnt to ask specific and detailed questions when catching up with me, since asking questions such as "what have you been up to" or "have you got anything interesting to tell me" gets a response of "nothing much" (because really my life is not that interesting).

In my ideal world the expectation would be "If you have something of substance to say, say it, otherwise stay silent"

 

[DogwoodTree]

Conversation is a form of bonding when with a familiar person.

Cognitively, I understand this. But experientially, it doesn't work for me, not quite like this. I've studied people's conversational behaviors for years, and through following decent role models, I've developed some adequate conversational skills. But it's all work for me. If there's an exchange of valuable information, then the work isn't so taxing. But I don't always see the value of the information being exchanged, even though I want to. Believe me, this is not from a lack of effort.

It flows

Not for me, it doesn't. I don't even know what emotions I've experienced during the conversation until well after the conversation is over.

When I'm around other people, I'm either in performance mode or I'm mostly noncommunicative. This doesn't bode well for a satisfying, personal interchange, despite four decades of practice. I really have tried, and I desperately want to experience what I see other people experiencing from social interaction. But it just doesn't work.

 

[On the Inside]

Conversation is a form of bonding when with a familiar person. Everyone has social needs, acknowledged or not. It usually deepens a relationship, is an opportunity to get to know someone better and maintain the friendship/relationship. A chance to see deeper into a person and/or learn their concerns. Conversation isn't supposed to be one-sided. Both persons should benefit, not always on a noticable level. It is a very social activity and a learned skill at the same time. It is about being a good listener and expressing thoughts into words. It is an interchange of encouragement, a chance to express thoughts. Not just information. There is something extraordinary about being able to have a comfortable conversation with a person. The thing about conversation is that it is not just words. It is can be simple or it can be complex. It isn't a math equation that you can just dissect. It flows, it's personal, and a powerful tool in expressing interest in other people.

That is a nice synopsis of the value of conversation in interpersonal relationships. I don't think anyone is missing the point, after all, sharing pertinent information is also of value to interpersonal relationships. However, if hanging out and chatting with people leaves you feeling like you missed something, or left you baffled as to why you just spent 20 minutes talking when the important info could be shared in a few minutes, then are both people really benefiting?

I've always been a good listener, but often fail in the give and take that a real conversation requires. I marvel at the ability of most of my co-workers to have multiple conversations with such a wide variety of people on a daily basis and still get anything done. I often go days without saying more than a few sentences to a couple of people, not because I dislike people, I generally get along with just about anyone, but most of my interactions seem to wither after a few minutes, and I find the only contribution I usually have is an off the wall remark that some might find funny.

 

[Sass]

All conversation, even if it seems inane, is someone trying to tell you something. Small talk between strangers is pretty much a way of indirectly saying 'I want to talk to you, but I might not know you very well yet, so I'll start with the basics'. Small talk between people who know each other well can mean 'I don't know what to say, or I've lost interest'. Sometimes I think the practicality of this stuff is ignored.

Language exchange often means that if you say 'you're boring and I don't want to talk to you' or 'this information is useless', you're likely to have an effect that isn't what you were after. A lot of NT people will then take you to task, verbally, on your manners, or why that's the case, and then you end up having an even bigger conversation about things you don't care about.

It's ALWAYS telling you something, the conversation thing, even if you're not interested in it. I know we're not known for reading between the lines socially, but I actually think we DO manage to know it, at least a small amount, because we wouldn't have so much social anxiety over what we'd said and what others responded with if we hadn't picked up a cue or two. Or maybe that's learnt with trial and error, I dunno.

I know that I can deconstruct a conversation and find hidden meaning, but maybe that's because my 'special interest' is language and writing.

 

[Jonathan Lees]

I am kind of the opposite, I talk way too much and sometimes have trouble keeping to one subject, or giving the other person a chance to talk.

that normally happens with aspies when talking about our obsessive interests (that we all pretty much have), or because out of nerves not allowing awkward silence. the other problem that sometimes can occur is not having enough self awareness to know when we are doing this, or notice when someone is annoyed with this. i worked hard to stop myself from being like this.

 

[On the Inside]

All conversation, even if it seems inane, is someone trying to tell you something. Small talk between strangers is pretty much a way of indirectly saying 'I want to talk to you, but I might not know you very well yet, so I'll start with the basics'. Small talk between people who know each other well can mean 'I don't know what to say, or I've lost interest'. Sometimes I think the practicality of this stuff is ignored.





I know that I can deconstruct a conversation and find hidden meaning, but maybe that's because my 'special interest' is language and writing.

I am also able to deconstruct conversations, only after the fact. While it is underway, it moves too fast and then the only way my brain works fast verbally is through humor. Not always appropriate. Then later I am left with the deconstruction project, what I should have said, what that person meant, etc.

 

[Progster]

Yes, this is totally true for me, too. I'm not much of a talker, and don't talk unless I have something to say. I find it tiring when people talk for the sake of talking, just to fill a gap that they perceive as awkward. If people don't have anything to say, I'd rather they didn't say anything.

 

[Beverly]

Conversation is a form of bonding when with a familiar person. Everyone has social needs, acknowledged or not. It usually deepens a relationship, is an opportunity to get to know someone better and maintain the friendship/relationship. A chance to see deeper into a person and/or learn their concerns. Conversation isn't supposed to be one-sided. Both persons should benefit, not always on a noticable level. It is a very social activity and a learned skill at the same time. It is about being a good listener and expressing thoughts into words. It is an interchange of encouragement, a chance to express thoughts. Not just information. There is something extraordinary about being able to have a comfortable conversation with a person. The thing about conversation is that it is not just words. It's also about what isn't said in a conversation that speaks the loudest. It is can be simple or it can be complex. It isn't a math equation that you can just dissect. It flows, it's personal, and a powerful tool in expressing interest in other people.

I've noticed that this is not the case for most on the spectrum. Someone asks "How are you?" We respond with "My car needs new tires but, I can't afford them because I've been denied a job after eight weeks and twenty one interviews even though I am qualified to do all of those jobs. I mean how much qualification does it take to clean hotel rooms, flip burgers, wash cars, walk dogs, sweep parking lots, mow lawns, scrub bed pans, mop the halls of that school, file papers in the courthouse, park cars at the hotel....?" And the NT walks off before we finish, that tells us they don't care, don't like us and, don't want to talk with us. Just the opposite of what is "supposed" to happen.

Yes I can reply. "Fine and you?" but that's just a script, it is meaningless, just something I've memorized because that's what's "normal" It's work, like taking a test, I just have to give the right answers, even if I disagree or, am flat out lying to give the answer that's expected and, that is tiring, annoying, dishonest, pointless and I learn nothing about the other person and, they don't learn anything about me. We don't connect, we can't because they refuse to hear anything substantial from me and, won't answer honestly and completely even if I bother to ask them something.

I don't read between the lines, I don't try to guess an alternate meaning. I say what I mean and, mean what I say, nothing more, nothing less and, I expect others to only say what they mean and, say all of what they mean. I could guess at more, but I might be wrong so why do that?

 

[karen70]

I was brought up surrounded by sarcasm and insults.

I didn't realise that this became my defence mechanism when I would shut down.

For example, i'd be shut off in my head and a partner would notice I had glazed over and ask whats wrong or more often than not ask 'what are you thinking?' to which I could never explain. This in turn would be seen as me being ignorant or purposefully 'devaluing' that person by me not 'sharing' my thoughts.

MY sons dad would totally go off on one at me, accusing me of being cold, thoughtless, detached etc. He prod and prod and prod to the point where I would explode. At this point it would ALL come out exactly how I felt.... but it would be absolutely nothing to do with whatever I was in a world of my own about.... cos I just didn't know what I was thinking.

Does this make sense????

 

[DogwoodTree]

Yes I can reply. "Fine and you?" but that's just a script, it is meaningless, just something I've memorized because that's what's "normal" It's work, like taking a test, I just have to give the right answers, even if I disagree or, am flat out lying to give the answer that's expected and, that is tiring, annoying, dishonest, pointless

Yes, exactly. I can give the "right" responses that are expected by the conversational script. But it's not authenticity. It's just a performance. And in that, there's no connection.

I imagine being an actor on stage, performing a family play where a fellow actor plays the part of my parent. But I wouldn't walk away from that performance feeling connected to that person as my real parent, because it's just an act. There's no real connection. Same thing when I "act" normal with NTs. It's just an act. So even if they feel an emotional connection with me, I don't feel an emotional connection with them like that, because for me, I've just been playing the expected part. (That doesn't mean I don't have feelings for people because I certainly do, but the outward expression of those feelings is not directly connected to the inner experience.)

So then, I've been advised to be more real with people, to be more myself so they can know the real me. That's awesome if what comes out is a fairly normal person who is likable. But what if the "real me" is naturally non-interactive, awkward, and socially immature?

The only chance for the conversation to flow fluidly is if I'm performing according to the rules of interaction. But that very thing then preliminates any possibility of true connection from my experience of the interaction.

For example, my native internal, mental language is in pictures, patterns, and movement. Not words. Words that are visual (written words) are much easier, because that's closer to my native mental language. That's why I write so much better than I speak. (When I'm listening to someone, I actually translate the spoken words into written words and diagrammed sentences so I can read them in order to understand them. But that takes time.)

So how do I authentically show up to a conversation that is happening via spoken words? It's like trying to carry on a conversation in a foreign language that I'm not very good at. The whole thing takes a great deal of effort. If I'm able to somehow maintain awareness of both my inner emotions and the external conversation at the same time, I become very awkward and immature, and this is not really who I am inside either. The only time I can bridge this gap between inner and outer worlds and still come across as an intelligent human being is when I'm talking about a special interest. And then I tend to go off the deep end, and give way too much information. So I try not to let that happen very often, which is also an isolating experience.

I learn nothing about the other person and, they don't learn anything about me. We don't connect, we can't because they refuse to hear anything substantial from me and, won't answer honestly and completely even if I bother to ask them something.

This quote highlights the point I made at the beginning--our focus, as aspies, is on information exchange. If there's no substantial exchange of information, we don't even perceive the existence of a connection or a purpose for the conversation.

But it seems that NTs are connecting in conversation at a completely different level from information exchange. It doesn't seem to matter what they're talking about. The point is to share this experience of relationship in the process of talking with each other. But for me, having a conversation is so much work, that there's not much bandwidth left to experience relationship on this flow-y, sub-language, satisfying level. There's a whole, entire process of translation going on, where I'm trying to connect my inner world to the outer world, and the chasm between the two is just so vast that there's no chance of "flowing." The connection is, in effect, lost in translation.

 

[Beverly]

Exactly DogwoodTree as Aspies we have to choose between a "normal" flow in a conversation and connecting. For us, the two are in opposition, we can't keep the flow NTs expect and, connect too because we need to both obtain and give new information to connect via a conversation and, 99% of the time, NTs are able to connect simply by saying it's sunny and they are fine, even though we know everyone has problems, has something they are working on that's difficult, needs money or whatever. None of that is "fine" to me, it's something going on in my life that needs attention but, apparently all of those things are "fine" to NTs and, they don't want to talk or hear about any of it.

Well, if I don't know anything about you beyond what I can see looking at you and, you don't know anything about me beyond what you can see and, what I do for a living because, with a career as public as mine, most people do know that, then I can't see any reason that there would be a connection between us.

Maybe you do like to cook, or do like music, raise animals, garden, something that we would have in common but, if you insist on blabbering about the weather and insisting that you are fine, neither of us will ever know what we have in common.