Can't be wrong because you can't change?

[Greatshield17]

Whoa, just a few minutes ago something came to me, and as I came here, this thought developed more and more and I actually feel rather uneasy or disturbed right now as I type this. Also a quick warning that this topic is related to my Faith, I'll avoid going into detail on it but it might come off sounding a bit strong, for lack of a better term.

I'm a Catholic, and as a Catholic, I hold certain social and political views; yet before I reverted to the Catholic Faith, I used to hold views that were contrary to Church teachings. I've been in debates and arguments with people who hold the views I used to hold; in such a situations, ideally I should have sympathy for such people and try to help them see why I came to view things the way I do now. But instead I just focus on how wrong said views are and often work myself up into a righteous anger. I'm not sure if it's guilt, (I did mention these things in confession when I reverted but, maybe it's disordered guilt or the like.) or not, but I am now wondering if maybe it's something Autistic? Because, I do sort of live like I've never had that past, and that's sort of true when one goes to confession and has his or her sins forgiven; but I wonder if I'm taking this too literally and this has more to do with an Autistic person not liking change, and I'm really just trying to kind of pretend that this change never happened. Is this the case? Or am I missing the mark entirely here? Has anyone ever gone through, or is going through a similar experience?

 

[Gerontius]

OK, there's definitely an autism-related factor to this. Work on your theory of mind: understanding where other people come from on stuff.

Sympathy is naturally difficult for a lot of Aspies. Don't work too hard on it. Work on exercising empathy, where you know WITH someone what they're going through.

You used to hold heretical views; very well then, you must have felt some justification for them. It's easier to understand where people are coming from, if you try to talk it over with yourself from your former self's point of view.

Quite honestly, the best thing that ever happened for me was to quit watching the news and "debating" with people.

 

[Misery]

Quite honestly, the best thing that ever happened for me was to quit watching the news and "debating" with people.

I'll second this.

And third it. And fourth.

Heck, just keep going until we're in the millions.

 

[Thinx]

Yes I definitely relaxed on arguing a point righteously when I understood that some of how I am is down to autism. It actually never made me feel good to do that, there was something almost obsessive about it, but I felt as if I had to... then when I understood about how autism can affect me I recognised that arguing a point and getting stressed about it didn't have to happen. Now I chill. Distract myself. Whatever. Etc.

It sounds like you are arguing the points relating to your faith just as stubbornly as you did your former views. It is part of autism to be black and white and righteous I think, or, focussed a bit obsessively on truth, say, but I do think, or certainly I have found, that we can interrupt this particular pattern where it gets difficult for ourselves or others, and do something different, and less stressful.

 

[Greatshield17]

OK, there's definitely an autism-related factor to this. Work on your theory of mind: understanding where other people come from on stuff.

Sympathy is naturally difficult for a lot of Aspies. Don't work too hard on it. Work on exercising empathy, where you know WITH someone what they're going through.

You used to hold heretical views; very well then, you must have felt some justification for them. It's easier to understand where people are coming from, if you try to talk it over with yourself from your former self's point of view.

Quite honestly, the best thing that ever happened for me was to quit watching the news and "debating" with people.

Okay, I guess I assume too much. I assume that I've just got to feed the information I have to the person I'm debating with, and he or she will be able to manage fine on one's own; without stopping to really consider what that person actually needs.

I do agree and see how it's much better for me to avoid debating and getting caught-up controversies, and focus on more simple and helpful things.

 

[Greatshield17]

Yes I definitely relaxed on arguing a point righteously when I understood that some of how I am is down to autism. It actually never made me feel good to do that, there was something almost obsessive about it, but I felt as if I had to... then when I understood about how autism can affect me I recognised that arguing a point and getting stressed about it didn't have to happen. Now I chill. Distract myself. Whatever. Etc.

It sounds like you are arguing the points relating to your faith just as stubbornly as you did your former views. It is part of autism to be black and white and righteous I think, or, focussed a bit obsessively on truth, say, but I do think, or certainly I have found, that we can interrupt this particular pattern where it gets difficult for ourselves or others, and do something different, and less stressful.

I see.

I am seeing more and more that I need to reflect more on me past, and what I believed and how I've changed, I've never really stopped to consider how much my past self would've disagreed with me.

 

[Fino]

Sounds to me like you're just behaving like everyone else. Are people known for disagreeing happily with other people? Republicans and Democrats, for example? Civil?

But either way, if you're debating people on religion, then does Catholicism not teach that it's God that changes the hearts and and minds of men? That it's not your job to strangle people into believing something? That less arguing and more praying might be the best way to go?

"For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places."
-Ephesians 6:12

 

[Gerontius]

I see.

I am seeing more and more that I need to reflect more on me past, and what I believed and how I've changed, I've never really stopped to consider how much my past self would've disagreed with me.

THIS. This is pretty cool. That's the self-reflection that distinguishes the lives of the saints from the people on the church porch after Mass who want to harangue you about how great Pope Francis is (or not.)

Sounds to me like you're just behaving like everyone else. Are people known for disagreeing happily with people? Republicans and Democrats, for example? Civil?

But either way, if you're debating people on religion, then does Catholicism not teach that it's God that changes the hearts and and minds of men? That it's not your job to strangle people into believing something? That less arguing and more praying might be the best way to go?

"For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places."
-Ephesians 6:12

This is genuine; there is an intellectual tradition as well inside Catholicism that calls for a philosophical & rational approach. But for it to work, you kinda have to just be open on both sides. A "Debate" isn't going to go as far as an offer of an alternate point of view.


Catholicism carries an aspect of "I'm right, you are not, care to find out?" But people forget the last part, that invitation to learn more. Catholicism says the meaning of life is to know, love & serve God-- Because he liked the idea of each one of us enough to create us. But we forget the love part & we end up with a Twilight Zone plot.

This is something everyone goes through. For Aspies specifically there is a burdensome side to it--we often lock in on something & then get combative when other people don't agree. It has an aspect to it of "Hey, come and learn from me this cool thing I figured out--WHY don't you care? Stupid NT's!" But it shouldn't. Fortunately chilling out & moderating this is the one social skill we can pick up pretty easily.

(As an aside, everyone is being super chill here compared to a certain other autism forum; y'all are the best, all of you. Every single one.)

 

[Karamazov]

I’ve had similar large scale shifts in my thinking, all secular/political/economical in my case: thought I’d share

So... I was brought up in a family that mixed high-church one-nation Toryism from one side with grassroots trade union socialism on the other, wasn’t consciously aware of this during my childhood or teens.

In my twenties I became very taken with Nietzsche, Austrian School Economics and anything that had an extreme individualism anti-state edge you it: naively took all this as the factual truth and was very self-righteous about it all.

However, I also had curiosity: I wanted to know what the two figures who were criticised the most had to say (I expected it to be infantile and an amusing read... ). So I read both Leviathan and Capital (Hobbes and Marx respectively). This left me very confused, for Marx made as much sense as Smith... Hobbes as much as Godwin.

So, I put such thoughts on hold, and returned to my first intellectual love: history. But whereas before I’d been pretty much exclusively focused on medieval Europe (and Western Europe at that) I found my interest broadened in both time and space: industrial era, Chinese empire, global overview of the development of mathematics... everything I can get my hands on.

Gradually the confusion and the self-righteousness dissolved: I ceased to believe that I have to be a this or a that, or to think such or so... because I realised that all of the “great thinkers” had moments of genuine profound insight, but none of them can give me “The Truth” of the situation... only fragments thereof, as they were able to see them.

So... I suppose I’m back where I started intellectually, but with knowledge and thought of my own.

(I was hoping this would work out as a whole fellow feeling but via different pathways through possible conceptualisations of existence thing: but I may have just rambled tangentially )

 

[YogaAbba]

Hi,

Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence; and keep your conscience clear, so that, when you are abused, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame. (1 Peter 15-16).
​

To me this quote gets to the heart of the matter.

I really appreciate that you are raising this question and discussing your Catholicism. I am in the process of becoming Catholic and it's nice to know there are Catholics out there in this community.

I wonder whether it would be helpful for you to review some of the apologetic materials by Peter Kreeft (Handbook of Christian Apologetics) and/or Trent Horn (he has a podcast)? Just having the material lined up in your mind might help because it provides a rational basis for asking your interlocutor about their reasoning: when they make a statement, it can be helpful to just ask -- define what you mean by . . ., or when you say x, what do you mean? That provides an opening to real discourse.

Theory of Mind has been mentioned. I just took an online questionnaire (https://psychology-tools.com/test/empathy-quotient)) on empathy, and a number of questions touch precisely on some of these points. Just the questions alone were thought-provoking.

Best wishes,
--YA

 

[Greatshield17]

THIS. This is pretty cool. That's the self-reflection that distinguishes the lives of the saints from the people on the church porch after Mass who want to harangue you about how great Pope Francis is (or not.)



This is genuine; there is an intellectual tradition as well inside Catholicism that calls for a philosophical & rational approach. But for it to work, you kinda have to just be open on both sides. A "Debate" isn't going to go as far as an offer of an alternate point of view.


Catholicism carries an aspect of "I'm right, you are not, care to find out?" But people forget the last part, that invitation to learn more. Catholicism says the meaning of life is to know, love & serve God-- Because he liked the idea of each one of us enough to create us. But we forget the love part & we end up with a Twilight Zone plot.

This is something everyone goes through. For Aspies specifically there is a burdensome side to it--we often lock in on something & then get combative when other people don't agree. It has an aspect to it of "Hey, come and learn from me this cool thing I figured out--WHY don't you care? Stupid NT's!" But it shouldn't. Fortunately chilling out & moderating this is the one social skill we can pick up pretty easily.

(As an aside, everyone is being super chill here compared to a certain other autism forum; y'all are the best, all of you. Every single one.)

I think should get back to reading St. Augustine's Confessions and finally finish the book. I keep getting sidetracked because I have so many other books I want to read and limited time to read them, but maybe I can find some time here or there to read the last bit of Confessions.

 

[Greatshield17]

I’ve had similar large scale shifts in my thinking, all secular/political/economical in my case: thought I’d share

So... I was brought up in a family that mixed high-church one-nation Toryism from one side with grassroots trade union socialism on the other, wasn’t consciously aware of this during my childhood or teens.

In my twenties I became very taken with Nietzsche, Austrian School Economics and anything that had an extreme individualism anti-state edge you it: naively took all this as the factual truth and was very self-righteous about it all.

However, I also had curiosity: I wanted to know what the two figures who were criticised the most had to say (I expected it to be infantile and an amusing read... ). So I read both Leviathan and Capital (Hobbes and Marx respectively). This left me very confused, for Marx made as much sense as Smith... Hobbes as much as Godwin.

So, I put such thoughts on hold, and returned to my first intellectual love: history. But whereas before I’d been pretty much exclusively focused on medieval Europe (and Western Europe at that) I found my interest broadened in both time and space: industrial era, Chinese empire, global overview of the development of mathematics... everything I can get my hands on.

Gradually the confusion and the self-righteousness dissolved: I ceased to believe that I have to be a this or a that, or to think such or so... because I realised that all of the “great thinkers” had moments of genuine profound insight, but none of them can give me “The Truth” of the situation... only fragments thereof, as they were able to see them.

So... I suppose I’m back where I started intellectually, but with knowledge and thought of my own.

(I was hoping this would work out as a whole fellow feeling but via different pathways through possible conceptualisations of existence thing: but I may have just rambled tangentially )

I think I understand the content of your post.

I do every now and then watch Youtube channels here and there, of people with contrary points-of-view. (usually ones where the people try to be very consistent with there views and avoid contradictions) I actually have a few books with me that are of that nature as well.

I do plan on going further with exploring as I grow spiritually.

Also I should add that there are times where I'd come across something I've seen in the past and then approach from my new point of view; and I do get joy out of seeing it from this point of view and seeing it all in a new light.