# Understanding non-autistic thought processes

* NOTE: This section does NOT explain everything that happens in SOCIETY, but it goes a long way to understanding SOCIAL situations.
* It is impossible to overstate the importance of self confidence in this world.
* Self confidence is invaluable in at least three aspects of life: attracting partners, dealing with people in general and in personal wellbeing.
* Understanding the role of self confidence is possible in the context of this framework, and although I think that it is true, it doesn't actually matter whether it is or not since it approximates non-autistic behaviour very well:
** Self confidence is a huge biological factor in animal mating rituals.
** Animals within a single sex of a species will compete amongst themselves by challenging each other in various ways to determine who dominates and submits to who. The end result of this is the "pecking order".
** Being high in a pecking order involves having few leaders and tends to increase "alpha partner" neurotransmitters that make an animal much more confident.
** Being low in a pecking order involves having many leaders and tends to cause more stress which decreases confidence and also shortens an animals life.
** Being confident is hard to fake since being bold tends to attract negative attention from the competition and may lead to fights.
** The opposite sex are attracted to the most confident since confidence is a key indicator of being the best of the competition.
** Since the opposite sex are attracted to the most confident and therefore successful within the pecking order, the offspring tend to get better DNA, and the species benefits.
** A females hormonal cycles make her more aggressive during the time that she is ready to mate, adding yet another confidence test in the case of a male.
** A male will tend to have these hormones most of the time, forcing a female to be much more selective.
** In species such as ours where the offspring are nurtured and raised by at least one parent, strength of character, generosity and sensitivity are huge factors in attractiveness.
** In species such as ours where raising offspring is a two parent job, compatibility and loyalty are also huge factors in attractiveness since the parents may be in each others company for quite some time.
** These rules seem to apply even when people are avoiding having children or only interested in casual sex. It simply appears to be so instinctive to non-autistic people that they don't even think about it.
* In this context, the following should be clearer:
** Most human endeavours and behaviours that are not related to survival are probably related to climbing the pecking order so that the individual can build self confidence and become more attractive.
** Clubs and sports are examples of social hierarchies that are often designed for the purpose of having a pecking order that can be challenged.
** Financial success, popularity and charity are often also social status games, though sometimes they have more to do with survival.
** Non-autistic people often believe something largely on the basis of how confidently it has been said. This is a powerful rule. None of the famous leaders or despots of the world would have gotten as far as they did without having consistently displayed an air of rock solid self belief.
** People often do things in personal interaction that are designed to test or demolish a persons confidence or challenge the pecking order.
** People also often use an attack on peoples confidence to communicate dissatisfaction. If the message isn't communicated properly, the situation can escalate.
** People often resort to telling a white lie or a "hint" rather than a truth which may appear to be an attack on someone's confidence. Considering this to be nice is probably a good idea.
** The concept of equality (or equity) that autistic people seem to hold so dearly often simply doesn't exist in non-autistic people, despite platitudes to the contrary.
** Presenting an air of confidence while assertively avoiding conflict can be a good strategy for surviving social situations generally.
** Presenting an air of confidence while assertively deflecting challenges can be a good strategy for thriving in some social situations.
** Initiating and winning challenges is a difficult thing for NT's to do, and is a recipe for disaster for autistic spectrum people.
** To initiate a challenge and not win is to lose. Since it is far too easy to be seen as initiating a challenge when trying to negotiate serious issues with other people, it is very important to make sure the other person knows that you're trying to negotiate rather than challenge.
** Small talk and body language help to avoid many potential conflicts which may come about according to these rules by communicating the basics about where people are coming from.
** Self confidence in and of itself enhances a persons ability to function effectively.
** To interact with people you like, it is often necessary to be part of a social hierarchy with people you don't like.
** There are men in this world who have no claim to any form of social status and whose confidence comes directly from being able to pull women.
* The difference between self esteem and self confidence is subtle yet significant.
** Self confidence (or self_efficacy) is what you have when you believe that you can survive the situation you are in satisfactorily.
** Self_esteem is what you have when you believe that your life is valuable and worth respecting.
* Where does the autistic spectrum mind fit into all of this? Perhaps we are stuck in "survival mode". Perhaps we are capable of finding fulfilment in things other than sex and relationships. Perhaps we are trying to play the social status game by developing passions to share with others.

## The Physiology and Energy of Self Confidence

* Lack of self confidence can also be observed at physiological and energetic levels. Therefore the question of self-confidence can also be addressed at these respective levels. Actions than can be taken are numerous, and can include sport, art, meditation, nutrition, and complementary and alternative medicine that understand correlation between self-confidence and physiology and/or energy.

## Another way to understand the social status game

* Just as in strategy games, the social status game has complex strategy, or unwritten rules which all stem from the simple idea that every player is out to win the game according to a specific measurement of success defined and limited by relatively simple written rules.
* In the social status game, the measurement and limitations seem to be part of Sexual_selection. To win in the game, one must mate as often as possible with appropriate partner/s. The implication of this is that one must BE the best possible mating partner that they can be as often as possible. In turn, one must perpetually be displaying examples of these characteristics.
* In fact, when people talk about maturity and development, they're usually talking about how far someone has progressed in this game.
* Examples of how these basic rules and goals end up translating into life's unwritten rules:
** Attractive people are nice to be close to and associated with and are therefore clean and otherwise physically attractive to appropriate partners.
** By being accepted by friends who are fellow competitors in the social status game, one gets to practice and display strength of character, loyalty, and other characteristics required to be accepted rather than dominated by such people.
** By helping others "less fortunate", one displays generosity. If done appropriately, this displays sensitivity. Put-downs often come under this rule.
** By having a good income and by being independent, one displays the ability to support a family.
** By having a better education and better marketable skills, one has access to better income opportunities.
** By being good at sports and by being able to resolve conflicts without losing face, one displays the ability to defend a family.
** By putting others slightly above or equal in the pecking order down, rank can be gained when swapping places in the pecking order. Done correctly, this should look like "helping someone less fortunate" or "resolving conflict without losing face" otherwise, this can look like bullying, which it often is, and backfire.
** By finding and maintaining an "image" and manner that appropriately reflects ones personality, one helps potential partners determine compatibility.
** By being subtle and discreet about your goals in this game and not promiscuous, one displays the characteristics required to remain loyal in long term child rearing relationships.
** Since equality/equivalence only ever exists between people who haven't determined who dominates in the pecking order, "difficult" children and other inferiors are always trying to assert leadership and the remedy is to show them who's boss. When this doesn't work, they have a disorder or an attitude problem.
** By being inventive and creative in such a way that the world becomes a better place, one almost by necessity has to worry less about personal gain and the social status game and ends up displaying only some of the characteristics of good mating partners and perhaps eccentricity, arrogance, mind blindness and lack of situational awareness.
** By going into unnecessary detail on any given subject, one fools with the plot mode picture building process, displays a lack of connection with their conversation partner and appears to be self absorbed.
** By playing with friends and losing, one gets a chance to learn from their mistakes, develop the characteristics of good mating partners and "mature". Therefore, over-reacting is missing the point of play.
** By playing with friends and winning, one gets a chance to prove ones value in their friends development. Therefore, playing too competitively and lording it over the loser is inappropriate.
** By having friends that are not at the same maturity level as oneself, one does not contribute and benefit contstructively from the relationship, therefore one has to "move on".
** By being a happy person generally, one displays comfort with ones place in the world, an ability to survive difficult situations and a readiness to mate.
** By being popular with, and "acquiring" potential partners, one has achieved the primary goal of the social status game, and therefore has little need to build further status. The object now becomes to put the characteristics displayed into effect.
** Since most children will grow up to marry and have children of their own, "development" is about accomplishing this goal and "maturity" is a measure of success.
** XXX This subsection needs to be rewritten and expanded into a book. The idea that non-autistic people are out to a> survive, and b> mate is the beginning of EVERY social story that is likely to help autistic spectrum people understand the non-autistic world.
* The subtlety here is that "displaying" is just as much about subconsciously proving to ones self where they stand in the pecking order. This is then reflected to potential partners by way of an outward display of confidence.
* The trick to understanding this game is that (particularly non-autistic) people tend to assume everyone is striving to play it ALL THE TIME. Every single action performed by everybody must somehow be an attempt to maintain or improve ones position on the ladder legitimately or illegitimately or to "cash in" and mate, or to survive so as to be able to do so, or to give in because one is unable to do so.
* One thing that I find helps me understand why NT's don't consider the practice in the last statement unethical is that their one and only philosophy is that EVERYBODY is playing social status games, and that kinda makes sense ethically. If everyone is playing social status games to win, then making them lose is OK.
* Please don't take this section too seriously, and if you do, try to read it constructively. Please also note that this section is likely to be a recipe for becoming a sociopath, if taken to heart.
* Personal observations:
** When I first observed autistic spectrum peoples behaviour as a child, it was as if they appeared to be more "real" than the non-autistic people, who seemed rather like ghosts or half people to me. I imagine that this was because my mirror neurons were firing for the non-autistic people.
** When I adopt a mindset in which everything happening around me socially must somehow be related to the primary goal as stated above, I can often work out where non-autistic people are coming from fairly quickly (not real time) and the ghost people are a lot more real to me. This makes it much easier to communicate with them too, but when I want to communicate with autistic spectrum people again it takes effort to switch back and rethink what is happening.
** Something that convinces me that this theory is close to the mark is that when I am thinking with this mindset, I tend to jump to the same conclusions about other autistic peoples social endeavours that non-autistic people do.
** One consistent point of failure in my social endeavours is when people realise that I am not interested in playing the social status game even when I've never broken any social rules. The first impression is always that I must be a whacko.
** These last statements tend to be consistent with observations I made of drama shows while researching this subject. Every show seems to have an odd collection of geeks, manipulators, and otherwise typical people. The manipulators always get a better "social deal" than the geeks, and both are tainted with the same brush when one screws up. It's as if people consider geeks to be less "mature" manipulators.
* Some may observe that the examples stated above assume that people are heterosexual and (relatively) monogamous and therefore the theory cannot be true. In answer to this, may I point out that there are in fact large rifts between gay, lesbian, heterosexual and non-monogamous cultures, perhaps for the very reason that the rules are necessarily slightly different for each of these cultures.
* Apparently this is not even a New Concept. See also w:Sexual selection and Geoffrey Miller.
* Reconciling this theory with other theories:
** Monotropism:
*** It could even be said that this game forces players to use the plot rather than detail view of the world since everybody has to be on the lookout for threats and opportunities and that non-autistic people are monotropic about social status rather than polytropic.
** Multiple causes of autism:
*** Throw a piece of mud at a wall.
*** Notice that the wall does vaguely nothing.
*** Notice that the piece of mud does many things. First amongst them, dividing into many differently behaving pieces of mud.
*** The social status game is EXTREMELY complex and there are MANY ways to deal with it when it's difficult to play. This doesn't mean that the different methods have different causes.
** Theory of Mind:
*** Understanding the context of any given situation is quite necessary before theory of mind is possible. One must understand something about mechanics to be able to assign motives to a mechanic from watching him work. The social status game described above is just such a context.
** Extreme Male Brain XXX:
** Central Coherence Deficit XXX:
** Executive Function Deficit XXX:

## Reasons that understanding the non-autistic world is necessary

* To be able to "defeat" your autism spectrum problems, you must be able to think like a non-autistic.
* Learning what the reward will actually be like when you succeed is worth the effort.
* Understanding the context of where non-autistic people "are" is an extremely useful TRANSLATION tool.
* Understanding how non-autistic people work tends to make them more predictable and helps to reduce social anxiety.
* To be able to survive in the non-autistic world while retaining self esteem one needs to know how to not give people reason to attack it.
* To be able to withdraw from the non-autistic world, one needs to know how to do so without stepping on peoples toes and be able to leave the door open for a return.
* To know how to enter and leave the world at will, one is able to waste less of ones time.
* To know the similarities and differences is to be able to recognise and communicate with fellow auties more effectively.
* Autistic spectrum people may have some similarities, but realistically, we all live in our own individual worlds, largely separated even from each other.
* To know how non-autistic people think, one is better equipped to create things for them. Think user interfaces, books and art.
* To be able to manipulate this environment, it is necessary to know what it is so that you don't end up destroying it and pissing people off.
* There is no point in trying to understand what autism is in technical terms without knowing what it is to be non-autistic, in technical terms. I strongly agree with Marc Segar on this.
* Understanding what is happening in the autistic spectrum world will be easier if autistic spectrum people know what the differences between the worlds are.
* The non-autistic world is making inroads into the autistic spectrum world lately and is quite willing to address any issues they see arising from our differences, some of which are quite real and many of which are not. We may have a sense of security in the vastly diverging differences amongst us, but if we do not make an effort, the solutions to these issues are likely to be theirs alone.

## Reasons to avoid understanding the non-autistic world

* It has long been known that an autistic spectrum person who gets too drawn into the non-autistic world will suffer. PeopleTemplate:Who? have said that Marc Segar killed himself because of this.

## Reasons that non-autistic people have issues making room for autistic spectrum people and probably always will

* Non-autistic people may know at some level what's going on and often explain it in their language, but rarely know in technical terms what they're doing.
* There is only ONE context of understanding in the non-autistic world. One approximated in this section. Switching to another is extremely difficult for anyone, let alone someone who has never done it before.
* There are in fact people who have bad higher level social skills who make a practice of taking advantage of others. These people are called manipulators or sociopaths and many of the social rules are designed as protection from them.
* Autistic people are often mistaken for sociopaths or manipulators because most people are not used to dealing with people who are very honest and/or genuine in their mannerisms. They often feel there must be some sort of agenda behind one's actions.
* An alternate view to the last statement: Autistic spectrum people are often mistaken for sociopaths or manipulators by non-autistic people because sociopaths and autistic spectrum people have the same fundamental characteristics in the non-autistic persons minds eye, only, the sociopaths are more worth talking to because their understanding of the non-autistic world is better because they focus more on interaction between people, as it interests them more.
* Another alternate view to the last two statements: Autistic spectrum people, especially people with aspergers (simply because people with aspergers tend to make social efforts more than autistics), may be viewed by non-autistic people as sociopaths because the autistic people may match the image of a sociopath. This is simply because autistic people may appear to not care in both their actions and words, while at the same time they may appear to not be genuine. This is a simplistic and uninformed view, of course, because it might be said that autistic people are the opposite of sociopaths: The autistic person cares and is often making an effort, an effort which may not come naturally, to appear social and to relate, while the sociopath is adept at being social and lacks concern or care for other people.

## Non-Autistic Thought Process Factoids

* Non-autistic people do their "developmental thinking" between social interactions, as opposed to during one or never at all. XXX define "developmental thinking".
* Non-autistic people seem to be able to quickly imagine and choose between the myriads of different ways that a conversation can go. This is an unconscious process for them.

### Autists vs non-autists

* Autistic people can "connect" if they have common interests. Outside of that, the communication problems can be just as difficult as between autists and non-autists.
* It is possible for autists and non-autists to "connect" as long as both parties can compensate for each others communication weaknesses.
* The work required by both parties to get to this point can be enough of a mind bender to make it difficult for a person to be able to communicate with their own kind if they make habits of the communication techniques that make this possible.
* Non-autistic people tend to learn by example and memorise by rote repetition.
* Autistic people learn by being able to find accurate visualised representations of the lesson, and gain faith in those visualisations by seeing them work in action.
* Non-autistic people tend to get all aspects of social interaction 50-99% right all the time.
* Autistic people can get aspects 100% right or 200% wrong, yet rarely, if ever will an autistic person be able to achieve 50% of all of them.
* Non-autistic people seem to make a game of judging each other by how close they get to 100% (see section on confidence). This may be at least part of the reason that it is difficult to get explanations out of non-autistic people. It can be seen as an attempt to cheat the game.