Community

[thejuice]

So it seems understood that humans are communal creatures and to be our best selves we ought to have a higher purpose through being altruistic and interested in our fellow person.

I'm not saying autistics can't be communal because they definitely can, it's seen in the mutual support network here and some have jobs that greatly benefit society. However why are we lacking interest in community and in people in general compared to the mean?

Isn't full participation in the community the pathway to a good, meaningful life?

 

[Judge]

However why are we lacking interest in community and in people in general compared to the mean?

Isn't full participation in the community the pathway to a good, meaningful life?

Regardless of neurological considerations, many people default to ideological principles and beliefs first and foremost. Sentiments which often taint any sense of community that do not involve the same ideology.

Social dynamics that can and do divide us even with a common struggle of autism. The irony being that our NT counterparts are no more different than we are in this respect.

In essence, some "common denominators" can unite people while others don't. A weird quirk of humanity, put to the test on occasion only under the most dire of circumstances.

 

[vergil96]

Because our brains are more attuned to things than people. Very sensory sensitive, often visual, logical mind.

 

[ManuelXX]

I'm not an expert, but part of the answer to your question could be that he have less "mirror neurons"(I'm not sure about this name) than neurotipicals, so we hardly recognise some needs of people who are part of the community

 

[AprilR]

I have always wanted to belong to a community, so i can't relate to disinterest in communities. Although i understand people getting disinterested after they have been treated badly by others in communities and such.

i think it is a necessity too, for example in old age and times of illness support for people is necessary. Not only emotional, and social but physical too. Not everyone has the money and means to hire a caretaker.

 

[Outdated]

I'm not saying autistics can't be communal because they definitely can, it's seen in the mutual support network here and some have jobs that greatly benefit society. However why are we lacking interest in community and in people in general compared to the mean?

I disagree with your surmise. Some of us are very idealistic and community minded, why do you think I'm still on this forum after I already learned what I wanted to know? Why am I involved in politics? Why am I involved in study projects and humanitarian lobby groups?

There is however a huge gap between being community minded and being that desperately needy and emotionally dependent that if three people you meet don't like you then you're going to get suicidal. Seems to be a lot of people suffering that type of mental illness and conflating it with autism.

 

[Roisin]

So it seems understood that humans are communal creatures and to be our best selves we ought to have a higher purpose through being altruistic and interested in our fellow person.

I'm not saying autistics can't be communal because they definitely can, it's seen in the mutual support network here and some have jobs that greatly benefit society. However why are we lacking interest in community and in people in general compared to the mean?

Isn't full participation in the community the pathway to a good, meaningful life?

I don't know if altruism exists.

For me, it's always social energy. I have enough reserves for a small circle of low-maintenance loved ones and for work. It's not that I don't want to be more involved with communities, but there are days when I have to use that social energy for work and not for a friend.

 

[Outdated]

It's not that I don't want to be more involved with communities, but there are days when I have to use that social energy for work and not for a friend.

That's exactly how it is for me too, except I headed in the opposite direction and ditched family and friends in favour of spending energy on what I see as necessary social reform.

 

[Rodafina]

So it seems understood that humans are communal creatures and to be our best selves we ought to have a higher purpose through being altruistic and interested in our fellow person.

I don't interpret any drive to participate in community this way.

I see it more as a remnant of an instinctual drive that kept us alive for thousands of years - it's dangerous out there on your own and ancient humans were likely better at surviving when they banded together. In groups, there is better protection from predators, improved ability to store resources, opportunity to share childcare responsibilities, and the chance to share knowledge and skills.

The truest human hermits seem to be at very high risk of actually going crazy - a kind of isolation far beyond what autistic introverts enjoy. I think our genes drive us to seek safety of body and mind and sometimes, that can involve other humans, otherwise known as a community.

 

[DrBadStrings]

The short version

As to that last point " Isn't full participation in the community the pathway to a good, meaningful life? " I think it is one of many paths.

--------------------
The ramble that got to the short version. That had about 20 more parts to it before I realized maybe I was getting carried away.
--------------------

That's if you believe in altruism, I don't think there can ever be true altruism as everything at some point is done for personal gain. Society is just one big ongoing version of the prisoners dilemma. It's always more beneficial if everyone cooperates but we just don't know if they will or not.

I do agree that humans generally are a communal species but after that I can't agree with the rest of that statement. That to be our best selves we have to do so in service of others? Or as you put it

"to be our best selves we ought to have a higher purpose through being altruistic and interested in our fellow person."

Don't get me wrong, I respect those that lead that kind of life but I think many can and do lead their best lives without full participation in the community. Some of those that have made the greatest contributions historically hated community and full participation. And then what about monks? For some of them their best self literally is the idea of full removal from society.

I also think the way you put it is alluding to some religious overtones. Which looses me as I'm not religious. While I do believe humans do things because of religion it's more that it's because of an idea they believe than any divine entities interventions.

I think you've defined nicely what being the best version of your particular self would be. I wish you best of luck in that pursuit but it's not mine and never will be.

As the best version of me will be living in a tiny house in the woods about 2-3km's off the beaten path. A place where at night there won't be noise/light pollution, and in the daytime never the sound of a passing car, or distant siren. Alone, at peace, content, with minimal participation at that point in community. 1 trip into town for supplies once a week will be enough community participation for me.

I don't hate community, I just prefer to be on my own as much as possible. I may not be the most productive member of society when I'm on my own, but I feel like I'm the best version of myself.

As to that last point " Isn't full participation in the community the pathway to a good, meaningful life? " I think it is one of many paths.

 

[jsilver256]

My way of being community-minded is through action. I cannot provide emotional support - this is not a preference, it's a fact. I am strongly alexithymic and I don't even recognize most emotions in myself, let alone recognize emotions in others and provide support. And with a day job and running a company which is supporting the livelihoods of seven people and increasing, my capacity for taking action is more than full and I need to be very conscious of my time commitments. I've gotten a lot more comfortable with delegating by necessity.

 

[jsilver256]

Don't get me wrong, I respect those that lead that kind of life but I think many can and do lead their best lives without full participation in the community. Some of those that have made the greatest contributions historically hated community and full participation. And then what about monks? For some of them their best self literally is the idea of full removal from society.

I also think the way you put it is alluding to some religious overtones. Which looses me as I'm not religious. While I do believe humans do things because of religion it's more that it's because of an idea they believe than any divine entities interventions.

As to that last point " Isn't full participation in the community the pathway to a good, meaningful life? " I think it is one of many paths.

Ironically, you are making the same point as what the actual Scriptures say.

 

[DrBadStrings]

"to be our best selves we ought to have a higher purpose through being altruistic and interested in our fellow person."

I've been thinking about that more and I think it needs to be split.

I really do agree with that idea that "to be our best selves we ought to have a higher purpose" but it's after that, the "through being altruistic and interested in our fellow person." that I disagree with, for myself at least. And that's because I feel that's one version of a higher purpose, one path. And I think that there are many equally valid and varied paths.

 

[Outdated]

I disagree with the concept of "higher purpose". The idea that there is one path or another. Your own personal interests and the best interests of your community or society need not be mutually exclusive. The idea that you can only have one or the other makes both unworkable.

[Edit] There's a very old English religious quote that I was taught exemplifies the attitude that brought about the industrial revolution:

"God helps them best as helps themselves."

 

[DrBadStrings]

Ironically, you are making the same point as what the actual Scriptures say.

No irony there at all, maybe a little, now I'm overthinking irony, thanks.

I believe most religions offer some very good lessons and insights on humanity and ways to lead a good life. I just don't believe in any of the after part of it is all. The possibility yes, but that possibility I believe is something we haven't even come close to understanding yet, much less expressing in words. I have read most of the big religious texts and lots of interpretation and study. It's a fascinating topic, well some angles of it. And I don't want to shock you too much, but I think if more people actually tried to follow what Jesus said, the world probably would be a better place. But I also think most self described "Christians" aren't really following what Jesus said. If he were around today it'd be more than just a money lenders table that he'd be knocking over. Probably start with a televangilists private luxury jet.

 

[jsilver256]

I disagree with the concept of "higher purpose". The idea that there is one path or another. Your own personal interests and the best interests of your community or society need not be mutually exclusive. The idea that you can only have one or the other makes both unworkable.

Arguably, putting gifts to work (as with the case of special interests) is also serving a higher purpose. It does not need to achieve an ends. The videos of what people can accomplish can be inspiring all on their own, even if it is as seemingly frivolous.

For instance, the tenaciousness required to get Doom to run by programming Windows Task Manager is quite awe-inspiring in itself. A Christian take would be that this is a form of glorifying God through the gifts he endowed.

 

[Outdated]

I'm very similar to DrBadStrings, although I haven't had anything to do with religion since I was a kid I probably live a lot closer to many of the ideals than most bible bashers. Some of my social concepts come from the bible, and from other religions as well, I just don't believe in magic.

 

[jsilver256]

And I don't want to shock you too much, but I think if more people actually tried to follow what Jesus said, the world probably would be a better place. But I also think most self described "Christians" aren't really following what Jesus said. If he were around today it'd be more than just a money lenders table that he'd be knocking over. Probably start with a televangilists private luxury jet.

Agreed on all counts.

 

[FilterFreq]

And I don't want to shock you too much, but I think if more people actually tried to follow what Jesus said, the world probably would be a better place. But I also think most self described "Christians" aren't really following what Jesus said. If he were around today it'd be more than just a money lenders table that he'd be knocking over. Probably start with a televangilists private luxury jet.

You're definitely not the only one who feels this way. Well said, too.

 

[WhitewaterWoman]

"to be our best selves we ought to have a higher purpose through being altruistic and interested in our fellow person."

I've been thinking about that more and I think it needs to be split.

I really do agree with that idea that "to be our best selves we ought to have a higher purpose" but it's after that, the "through being altruistic and interested in our fellow person." that I disagree with, for myself at least. And that's because I feel that's one version of a higher purpose, one path. And I think that there are many equally valid and varied paths.

I see it in a similar way but with critical difference. It’s not necessarily that we must have a higher purpose, but we must acknowledge there is something, anything, that is greater than ourselves.

A life in which I am the pinnacle of everything in the world is an impoverished life indeed.

And I think that there are many equally valid and varied paths.

Exactly.

So it might be having a greater purpose, serving community or believing in a god, or even - as one AA man I knew phrased it - Gladys (what he decided to call his HP, because he did not believe in God.)

Community has many, many different meanings. But if the position is that we must be always in the company of and working with other human beings, I would say, not.