SHAWN LAJAMBE
New Member
Hello. this post is more to introduce myself to the community. my 10yr son and i are diagnosed with high functioning autism (aspergers). if that's even something that's really diagnosable imo.
we have spent years trying to isolate and understand what this really means to us as individuals, and how the father-son relationship should unfold. it's been a trial to say the least.
everyday seems to be a learning curve on how it shapes, and should shape, our social interactions.
i wrote a post the other day on my facebook, which was intended for my beloved and estranged wife, to try and provide clarity on just how our minds work.
for the past 10yrs, we have worked to acknowledge and understand hfad. we were unable to break ground together in identifying traits, and requirements that would be the most beneficial to the raising of our son.
we strongly disagree with each other to this day on how we perceive the future for him should unfold from a parental perspective, because we obviously see things differently from each other.
one thing my wife always commented on with me, was having a lack of empthay. not understanding the implication of when, where and how to display necessary emotion.
it's true. it's a mysterious and complicated idea to someone like me. my reactions have always made me seem awkward and out of place in social settings. you become accustomed to it after awhile.
deciding on how to approach teaching the concept to our son, remains unresolved.
I've written below, what i see as an insight, that may shed light for some people, on how aspergerean minds try to comprehend an idea like empathy; the process that unfolds when introduced to it; identifying the structure, shape, sound and feel of it. what thought processes are occurring, and how a resolution to the problem is found.
this may not be for everyone, but this is my interpretation, and i welcome feedback!
Empathy, as understood by someone with high functioning Aspergers.
there's a difference in exhibiting empathy
and understanding it.
the first inclination is to automatically feel imbued to decide on fear, grief, confusion, defensive or an offensive stance, as an almost randomly derived output, when faced with a moral dilema.
you understand that morality is derived of subconscious directive, and that a dilema, is a problem of being at odds with perceived subjective opinion.
your subconscious decides for you, (or is that 'you'), at seemingly the speed of light.
Based on your acquired personality traits.
You realize there is an audience. Even if it's just one.
So you feel compelled to provide a response.
An answer almost.
That requires introspective insight and clarity on what form and meaningful interaction the output will justify.
What good is having a predicament, if you can't ponder it?
Anyway, you pick a position, and almost robotically, you are preprogrammed to respond in a certain way.
Was it the correct way? It's irrelevant. The delineating paths are finite and predictable.
What matters, is that you understand you have a choice. Even if the selection of choices is finite and predictable.
So you feel compelled in one way, or another, to provide output, whether desired, or not. You need to expend energy on finding a reasonable solution to this precidament. you understand that each possible answer will reflect differently from each mind around you.
so you use your lifelong library of personal and social interactions, to piece together a process that exhibits understanding and meaningful insight, into the deep, sought after answer to the obvious; 'why and how?'.
your journey to this point, has been fraught with the expected difficulties of being seen as obsessively compulsively interested in just the meaning of the question, and less interested in the outcome of the wording itself.
the answer can be equally as fascinating, but it's in a territory of its own, so you focus on one path only, and that predictable and clear path offers the correct level of guidance needed to achieve the goal, but not over do it by too much of a margin.
a margin of error is not a typical idea that's frequently considered. you already 'know' all of the possible outcomes. your movement dictates which path you are following, because you feel it will be the most benefical and least taxing in the end.
a selection is made, your mind reacts appropriately.
you move your lips correspondingly and the output is delivered.
congratulations to you for accomplishing such a complex task...
after what seems like many moments, a reaction to your vocalization is typically administered in your direction.
you are receiving the anticipated input from your audience.
sometimes it's difficult to decipher correctly, so your initial and spontaneous reaction, is to overeact with admonition and an intimidating posture, but actually, you need to internalize it more deeply.
a thoughtful approach, to an idea of ideological idiosyncrasies, that play on your subconscious, so, you step back and consider the potential outcomes.
you relax momentarily, and consider the vexxing dilema that you are struggling to comprehend.
ultimately, you realise it was you who set this up intentionally, to realise an outcome, and you are procrastinating on delivering a response.
you hold your breath for a moment, as you internalize the data, and look outward in semi-confusion.
you're not sure now if your output was received the way you perceived it should be.
so you recoil slightly, and wait for definitive feedback.
this is the life of a person with aspergers. you never really understand what should be obvious in your perceived existence, but you try really hard, and sometimes, you fail.
if you could just promote a visual journey that is captivating, mesmerizing, and full of intrigue, you would make that journey so much easier to enjoy and appreciate for everyone involved.
Intrigue is found in many places.
we have spent years trying to isolate and understand what this really means to us as individuals, and how the father-son relationship should unfold. it's been a trial to say the least.
everyday seems to be a learning curve on how it shapes, and should shape, our social interactions.
i wrote a post the other day on my facebook, which was intended for my beloved and estranged wife, to try and provide clarity on just how our minds work.
for the past 10yrs, we have worked to acknowledge and understand hfad. we were unable to break ground together in identifying traits, and requirements that would be the most beneficial to the raising of our son.
we strongly disagree with each other to this day on how we perceive the future for him should unfold from a parental perspective, because we obviously see things differently from each other.
one thing my wife always commented on with me, was having a lack of empthay. not understanding the implication of when, where and how to display necessary emotion.
it's true. it's a mysterious and complicated idea to someone like me. my reactions have always made me seem awkward and out of place in social settings. you become accustomed to it after awhile.
deciding on how to approach teaching the concept to our son, remains unresolved.
I've written below, what i see as an insight, that may shed light for some people, on how aspergerean minds try to comprehend an idea like empathy; the process that unfolds when introduced to it; identifying the structure, shape, sound and feel of it. what thought processes are occurring, and how a resolution to the problem is found.
this may not be for everyone, but this is my interpretation, and i welcome feedback!
Empathy, as understood by someone with high functioning Aspergers.
there's a difference in exhibiting empathy
and understanding it.
the first inclination is to automatically feel imbued to decide on fear, grief, confusion, defensive or an offensive stance, as an almost randomly derived output, when faced with a moral dilema.
you understand that morality is derived of subconscious directive, and that a dilema, is a problem of being at odds with perceived subjective opinion.
your subconscious decides for you, (or is that 'you'), at seemingly the speed of light.
Based on your acquired personality traits.
You realize there is an audience. Even if it's just one.
So you feel compelled to provide a response.
An answer almost.
That requires introspective insight and clarity on what form and meaningful interaction the output will justify.
What good is having a predicament, if you can't ponder it?
Anyway, you pick a position, and almost robotically, you are preprogrammed to respond in a certain way.
Was it the correct way? It's irrelevant. The delineating paths are finite and predictable.
What matters, is that you understand you have a choice. Even if the selection of choices is finite and predictable.
So you feel compelled in one way, or another, to provide output, whether desired, or not. You need to expend energy on finding a reasonable solution to this precidament. you understand that each possible answer will reflect differently from each mind around you.
so you use your lifelong library of personal and social interactions, to piece together a process that exhibits understanding and meaningful insight, into the deep, sought after answer to the obvious; 'why and how?'.
your journey to this point, has been fraught with the expected difficulties of being seen as obsessively compulsively interested in just the meaning of the question, and less interested in the outcome of the wording itself.
the answer can be equally as fascinating, but it's in a territory of its own, so you focus on one path only, and that predictable and clear path offers the correct level of guidance needed to achieve the goal, but not over do it by too much of a margin.
a margin of error is not a typical idea that's frequently considered. you already 'know' all of the possible outcomes. your movement dictates which path you are following, because you feel it will be the most benefical and least taxing in the end.
a selection is made, your mind reacts appropriately.
you move your lips correspondingly and the output is delivered.
congratulations to you for accomplishing such a complex task...
after what seems like many moments, a reaction to your vocalization is typically administered in your direction.
you are receiving the anticipated input from your audience.
sometimes it's difficult to decipher correctly, so your initial and spontaneous reaction, is to overeact with admonition and an intimidating posture, but actually, you need to internalize it more deeply.
a thoughtful approach, to an idea of ideological idiosyncrasies, that play on your subconscious, so, you step back and consider the potential outcomes.
you relax momentarily, and consider the vexxing dilema that you are struggling to comprehend.
ultimately, you realise it was you who set this up intentionally, to realise an outcome, and you are procrastinating on delivering a response.
you hold your breath for a moment, as you internalize the data, and look outward in semi-confusion.
you're not sure now if your output was received the way you perceived it should be.
so you recoil slightly, and wait for definitive feedback.
this is the life of a person with aspergers. you never really understand what should be obvious in your perceived existence, but you try really hard, and sometimes, you fail.
if you could just promote a visual journey that is captivating, mesmerizing, and full of intrigue, you would make that journey so much easier to enjoy and appreciate for everyone involved.
Intrigue is found in many places.
