If it has to change we want a say in it, we want control but people are unfit for control.
In the case of savantism and a human being who never really gained the ability to identify self, because they did not arrive at the “I AM” stage of awareness…
Their minds become a mirror of what is, or at least those parts of their world that their nervous systems can allow them to mirror comfortably, and thus they seem to have an inhuman clarity regarding many seemingly mundane observations. They often come to strange but factual conclusions about those things they observe. This is possible for everyone, though.
For normal people, intentional simplicity would be easier with but a moments reflection, because they have a functional relationship with their senses and their physical presence, or at least started with one.
Is that like choosing to stay out of an argument between family members? It is actually. Your instincts tell you they must resolve the issue by themselves. That should be trusted.
I get asked, “What do you think dear?” and I say, “Talk to the hand.” You don’t even need to say that. Just tell them you love them and let them keep talking. They will be disoriented, but won’t be able to find fault.
I think this is what monks are trying to cultivate with the renouncing of possessions. Striping one down to the self and cultivate true humility. Yes. They seek what they call one pointedness. Seeing that, they become the real and essential self as well as the root of all strength and human virtue. The quintessential human observation is I AM I, or as it as said in the Bible, “I am that I am.” But this can be very hard to perceive, especially in the midst of social and cultural conditioning. The purpose of any act really only comes from one realization, everything else is mental noise.
Too simple means there is no problem to work out. So it almost is easier to understand something more complicated. Well, I can give normal’s a problem to work out if they want one. This is the reason why autistics are seen to have a problem. As I was saying earlier, neurotypical individuals have a functional relationship to their senses and their physical presence. At least at first, before they developed all their twisted complexes.
In the case of an autistic, they never properly move into the realization of self, because the message of the senses is stress, then distress, then psychological pain. This is why the autistic never seems fully present to others. They cannot be self, because though they perceive the world simply, they perceive it too intensely. Sight is not just sight. Sight is an agonizing flood of data that makes it hard to think. Speech is not just sound that may or may not have meaning. It’s a stream of complex and structured noise that, although their mind can make intelligible sense of, dominates their awareness. So they cannot begin to fathom in the normal way that they should treat this speech as a message object and formulate a response.
For normal people, their perceptions are much quieter. They have the gift of self, a clear and simple self, then they go and piss on it with all these elaborations that make them hurt themselves and others.
So how does the world become bearable for someone with autism? The world becomes bearable to an autistic when it can become connected, and when they can find a point to connect with it. They find a place in the consensus to “install” the camera that is their mind, and can feel a sense of security and purpose. Even rapport based on exchange with others that they can understand and make sense of. They can come to know a simple and pervasive joy from the bliss of pure understanding.
Hence the single minded focus many develop? Yes. Having no guides, they really do the best they can. And having normal’s who can’t bring themselves to be with them instead of impinge on their awareness in the name of “teaching”. Normal teaching is torment for them, but here is the bigger secret. Normal teaching is torment for normal’s also. This is why people say I am good at teaching, and why the group Pink Floyd wrote the song, “The Wall.”
And does therapy help them or hinder them? It hinders them for the most part, expect for physical, sensory, or occupational therapy. They can learn to translate their experiences if they are given the venue to experience so called normal function.
I took a workshop from a scientist who had asperger’s syndrome. He always looked at the floor, and finally told us that he became so lost in looking at faces that he forgot what he was talking about and couldn’t lecture. He may or may have not also told you that he could not really avoid making observational comments, even if they were considered socially abnormal. He probably spoke on his lecture and had a sort of weird running narrative about the lecture at the same time? He did, actually. This is normal. It’s how he organizes his thoughts. And yes, there is a whole world to read in faces. It is very distracting, even if he actually likes people and looking at faces.
If an autistic doesn’t have the notion of self is the idea of humility also foreign to them? It is, yes. It’s either a foregone conclusion and they just assume everyone sees the world in a simple way, or they learn the hard way what people mean by humility and usually do their best to avoid humble people. Because humble people are both self effacing and effusive about it.
I don’t think I have heard of aspergers syndrome before. Is that similar to autism? It is similar. It is perhaps a label that applies to me, for whatever that is worth.
It is in the autism spectrum. Actually debated as to if it’s a separate disorder they should keep. The point is moot. The reason it’s risky, though, is people are still labouring under assumptions about the nature of the aspergers consciousness and the autistic consciousness in general. And well… Those with aspergers will universally say that the popular medical and scientific view of autism as a disease is wrong.
Your thoughts are welcome. Be well friends.