Temple Grandin: Autism spectrum, Asperger's, neurodivergence

[esq]

[Bertrand]

man, Temple Grandin is such a genius I love her

[The Exception]

SLI?

[squark]

Only 13 minutes in, but wanted to say thank you for sharing this because it's very interesting. Back to watching now. . .

[The Reality Denialist]

She understands how environment animals feel/sense: what is natural and what is not and how to change it. That is some sort benchmark. Amazing.


I think she is very peculiar SLI.
@Tallmo what do you think about her ?

[Tallmo]

I think she is LII.

There seems to be some valued weak Si. But i cant see SLI

[wacey]

Yeah LII...? These are principles and fundumentals and system of relations, very linear to positive or reversed back to negatives. Plus she's got that grumpy-merry INTj type thing going on.

[hatchback176]

Obviously ILE, Richard Feynman and Colonel John Boyd talk the exact same way

[Tallmo]

ILE would be the other alternative. But i prefer LII. She seems more base Ti and there is a hint of Si command that i dont get from iles. She is also making my head expload from the heavy Ti use.

Creative subtype makes it challenging to separate mirror types

[The Reality Denialist]

She is photo realistic thinker.

http://www.grandin.com/inc/visual.thinking.html

Are there LIIs that are that visual?

Everything visual I can remeber is most closely described in terms of myopic vision. Absracted blocks.

[The Reality Denialist]

Looks bit static



Interesting. I have heard of people who can think in photorealistvally. Not the same type.

Photorealism helps so you don't have to memorize evertyhing in terms of causal relations finally having mind as math like cosntruction. Something what I do. Imagining stuff is different and very active includes sythesis over many things but image recal is very very bad. People tend to say that I don't really see what is in front of me.

[hatchback176]

I don't know where you're getting any Si command from the way she uses flailing, teeter-tottering hand-gesturing and neck-extension to punctuate her verbal expressions. Si keeps it's center-of-gravity and breathes from the diaphragm.

[The Reality Denialist]

I don't really notice those things.

[squark]

Hm, she doesn't think spatially or analytically but in objects and associations. Non-linear. Very visual object art type focus - tests 3-d constructions in her mind for feasibility. Running simulations in mind - dynamic, Te. Photo-realistic objects, not focused on the connections between the objects. (Objects>fields iow) Perspective-taking - what is the cow seeing? Absence of archetypes - everything real world object she's seen before. The opposite of Ni (which is strong in archetypal pattern thinking.) Looking at her mind and how it works rather than her body-language, but her mind itself and the ideas she talks about are more interesting to me than her type.

[hatchback176]

Makes very little sense to not look at how her body works if you're trying to imply introverted sensation. All descriptions for ILE says they are Inventors. She doesn't reference her own internal sensations only her thought process. She is self-aware of concept formation and the functional organization of Neuroscience when that's the specific deficit of Autistic brains.
http://www.grandin.com/inc/visual.thinking.html

[wasp]

i love temple grandin but is it really possible to type her based on how she describes her thought process when she's most likely describing the aspects of her thought process which line up with autism spectrum disorder? even if her thought process is still unique to herself, i think it's almost like an exercise of throwing a blanket typing over those who exhibit traits and behaviors of autism spectrum disorder instead of typing temple grandin as an individual

[The Reality Denialist]

Apparently she is photorealisstic thinker. That itself does not make utistic and furthermore they can think very differently.

[Enkidu]

i love temple grandin but is it really possible to type her based on how she describes her thought process when she's most likely describing the aspects of her thought process which line up with autism spectrum disorder? even if her thought process is still unique to herself, i think it's almost like an exercise of throwing a blanket typing over those who exhibit traits and behaviors of autism spectrum disorder instead of typing temple grandin as an individual

Right, I think you pointed out something important there. With pervasive developmental disorders like Grandin's autism made famous, typology isn't accurate and somewhat disrespectful. Similarly, bi-polar, schizophrenia, mood disorders like BPD, and different forms of memory impairment untreated are states of mental decay, so identity is either in disarray, shifting, or flipped. From what I understand, it's the equivalent of typing Robin Williams as ESFj - because it covers everything, just in case. Grandin is an odd duck. Her Animals Make Us Human and Animals in Transition are extremely insightful given her unusual perspective and education, but what I found somewhat extraordinary was her ability to develop functional social skills and potentiate her savantism in an era when mental health was treated with ECT. Some of the clients I work with struggle with very basic life skills or expressing their emotions in healthy ways, yet Grandin reads a crowd, tells jokes (!), and is strangely performative (she was wearing a cowgirl outfit when I saw her speak in Chicago) ...Yet her self-knowledge is strangely academic and while she feels extremely deeply and purely, that emotional expression is misplaced and misunderstood, lacking the social context.

[golden]

I think when someone is not neurotypical, it's very questionable how to apply a system like Socionics. I'm not saying it can't be done, but I do think it's unclear how to say where the neurotype and sociotype overlap and diverge. For example, her body language is being considered. But sensory processing issues and muscle tone issues are common in autism, iirc ... yet are they aspects for her? I think we would need a lot more information than is evident on the surface.

[Bertrand]

i love temple grandin but is it really possible to type her based on how she describes her thought process when she's most likely describing the aspects of her thought process which line up with autism spectrum disorder? even if her thought process is still unique to herself, i think it's almost like an exercise of throwing a blanket typing over those who exhibit traits and behaviors of autism spectrum disorder instead of typing temple grandin as an individual

this sounds superficially progressive but at the same time people are throwing out mental illness diagnoses at things that are essentially type all the time under the same banner of humanistic "concern".. in other words, grandin is autistic and SLI and there's nothing really prejudicial about that, and the more pernicious accusation is usually when type is left out of it, but still subconsciously at work, and people call it illness without respect to type. like how deltas will frequently type EIE as mentally ill for just being EIE. when they're feeling particularly benevolent but still making the implicit association the logic is usually something like "lets not call this person an EIE because I personally think they're mentally ill"<-- this is your progressive stance, but the point is the whole thing is assbackwards. typology hasn't progressed to the point where its been hardened into a technology which would, in turn, justify such a stance, people are still trying to get the underlying structure straight, so this way of treating it is not constructive. i don't really expect most people to understand this, but it needs to be said. real understanding would be like this person is EIE and what I'm seeing, although I associate it with mental illness, is not actually mental illness but a product of my own projections: i.e.: they appear to be acting in a way that would be mentally ill only if I, or mine, were doing this. only when one can see that dynamic with clarity can one really claim to have overcome the bias one is hamfistestedly trying to root out. in the case of Grandin it would be something like, first of all autism is not mental illness, and if you separate the implicit pejorative nature out of things, there's little to no concern about taking someone at their own word, because second guessing the sanity of people is off the table, thus a paternal attitude is misplaced when it comes to typology in general if you actually have a firm grasp on it. it doesn't have to be this game of how can we apply labels in some kind of maximally benevolent way, as if anyone should care about that, because we're not living in the world where the signs have supplanted the things, and thus we need to somehow second guess self applied signs for the benefit of our wards. this is a mindset not appropriate at this time for typology. although the mindset in some sense prevails on these very forums, it is bound up with such a fundamental misunderstanding of typology it hardly justifies the claim they're even doing typology. it really is more like horoscope, in the way alpha loves to make fun, for many. the point is to somehow progress through and past all that


in other words:
delta-----------alphas-----------------------------beta--------------------------gamma----------------delta-----------
stupid bullshit---positivisticly defensible theory------implementation of the theory---cost-benefit analytic---simple usable tool
you are here--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------most forumites think they're here (in how they treat typology, their self types run the gamut [1])
strong ethics, but poor reality sense (NFs)----------------------------------------------------------------strong concrete thinking but needs lots of ethical reframing (STs)


the problem is when people are using the thing outside the proper timeframe... if socionics hasn't run through the entire scheme of the socion itself, delta thinks its a tool or reducible to its superficial application, when its actually an application of stupid bullshit, because using it as a tool is out of step with the process required for the way they intend to use it to match up with what its actually been refined into. the above quote ethical concern is more appropriate after its gone through a trip, otherwise it just distorts and re imagines what's not even firm or reliable in the first place. this is how you get constant woo-woo back and forth snake oil jelly, because its a reimagintation of nothing thats been reduced to concretion to begin with. this is why so many people criticize socionics, because its susceptible to this, and because it needs to be reducible, in principle, to concretion in order to even have a possible future... the sort of ethical concerns that can actually reach it come later

this is the problem of typology in general at this time




[1] for essentially the same reasons, they think about it technologically, implicitly

[chrys]

Lol my mind truly is associative and based in images. I can be mute for days because I don't have coherent and communicable thoughts when it comes to logical and concrete conversations. But I can spit out random ideas one after the other that have little to no connection to eachother. My brain feels like a wasteland where all my memories are underground and difficult to dig up when provoked to do so, but above the ground, in the sky even, my brain is limitless and forms ideas out of the thin air, and I realize my brain isn't empty afterall. It's only empty in the eyes of sensory and logical types who in their mind, an intelligent person is one who has concrete and well formed thoughts and memories.

I used to not consider myself autistic because I always have been more dramatic, self/socially aware, sensitive, and reactive to others than your average aspie. I think I considered narcissism + social anxiety as a replacement for that diagnosis, but then realized I did have pretty weird thought patterns compared to the majority of people and probably was an aspie afterall.


Associative thinking also makes it easy to "overdose" on too much input. I wonder if listening to ambient music and being easily overwhelmed by popular art is common amongst people like me. Because with the power of association, even silence creates images. And pop music and noise is like a new foreign race coming into your brain and raping and pillaging all your ideas, forcing itself into you. Not pleasant.

[Not A Communist Shill]

I decided ILI>LII when I thought about it recently. I enjoyed the Hollywood movie.