Looking for astrology study participants

[Sunsprawl]

I didn't realize there was this controversy. Either way, that doesn't deal with whether or not Autism is a spectrum.

I'm not questioning Autism as a spectrum. My question is about whether or not Asperger's shows up in the significations of the chart as a less severe form of very severe Autism or whether there are different signifiers for more severe cases. I'm not challenging any paradigms, I just hope to find meaningful relationships in order to be of more help in consultations with parents and adult autists (those who find astrology a reasonable path of personal discovery and inquiry, that is ;-) ) and just understand this very special experience of existence a little better. There are people I love dearly who share the Asperger's experience.

 

[Misery]

I thought I told this to unwatch the thread.... Feh, whatever. I guess I can respond to this one thing real quick simply to clarify what I meant and where it's coming from.

But anyway:

While I agree with you in many ways, I feel like the technology that surrounds us everywhere we go is more impressive than you give it credit for. Computers, smartphones, cars, airplanes, space travel, satellites, microwaves, vaccines, medicine, surgery, and on and on and on, pretty much everything amazes me.

But I still basically agree with you in most ways.

I've been *constantly* exposed to high-end tech all my life (except the space travel thing). This due to my father; when I was very little, he decided that things like home PCs and other tech would very likely become really major in the future, so he wanted me to be able to grow into that and grow up with it instead of crashing into it as an adult. And if he wants to buy something like that, it's always the best of the best.

So I get exposed to so much tech that many would consider amazing. Particularly computers. The one I have for instance... home PCs simply dont get more powerful than that thing. I carefully tested that fact.

The side effect of that non-stop exposure is two things: The strange and fantastic really isnt, to me. Like VR for instance. To many people, what I show them in VR when I offer the chance to try it is mindblowing, an experience they could not have expected, even if they try it multiple times. To me, it's just Tuesday. Even the first time I tried it, it was fun and I knew the potential, but it couldnt hit that ultra-high point for me. Though usually when I speak about it to people I try to describe it as amazing, as I like to get people interested in it and maybe try it themselves.

Yes I know all of that sounds braggy but I dont particularly care.

But also, this means I see the flaws in everything that might not be apparent to most. My inherent negativity boosts that. And in basically all of these machines... the flaws run deep. Very deep. PARTICULARLY with computers. I could rant for 20 straight pages about why THOSE are a problem. Accursed things. Even with VR, I saw the flaws *immediately*. I structured my learning experience of "getting my VR legs" around the absolute expectation that those flaws and others would appear during the process (and they did).

So that's part of why I think the way I do.

But really what I mean by "primitive" is that the tech we have is only amazing compared to what came before it on this extremely specific world. When compared to the sheer incomprehensible complexity of the universe, or the possibilities it contains... we've achieved nothing yet. Nothing. Yet everyone thinks we know everything and have figured out the deepest mysteries. Ridiculous.

Hm, I hope none of that sounded somehow aggressive. Everything hurts and it's snowing and I'm extra irritable right now. Bah. But that's a topic for another day.

There, now I'm really done.

 

[Fino]

I thought I told this to unwatch the thread.... Feh, whatever. I guess I can respond to this one thing real quick simply to clarify what I meant and where it's coming from.

But anyway:



I've been *constantly* exposed to high-end tech all my life (except the space travel thing). This due to my father; when I was very little, he decided that things like home PCs and other tech would very likely become really major in the future, so he wanted me to be able to grow into that and grow up with it instead of crashing into it as an adult. And if he wants to buy something like that, it's always the best of the best.

So I get exposed to so much tech that many would consider amazing. Particularly computers. The one I have for instance... home PCs simply dont get more powerful than that thing. I carefully tested that fact.

The side effect of that non-stop exposure is two things: The strange and fantastic really isnt, to me. Like VR for instance. To many people, what I show them in VR when I offer the chance to try it is mindblowing, an experience they could not have expected, even if they try it multiple times. To me, it's just Tuesday. Even the first time I tried it, it was fun and I knew the potential, but it couldnt hit that ultra-high point for me. Though usually when I speak about it to people I try to describe it as amazing, as I like to get people interested in it and maybe try it themselves.

Yes I know all of that sounds braggy but I dont particularly care.

But also, this means I see the flaws in everything that might not be apparent to most. My inherent negativity boosts that. And in basically all of these machines... the flaws run deep. Very deep. PARTICULARLY with computers. I could rant for 20 straight pages about why THOSE are a problem. Accursed things. Even with VR, I saw the flaws *immediately*. I structured my learning experience of "getting my VR legs" around the absolute expectation that those flaws and others would appear during the process (and they did).

So that's part of why I think the way I do.

But really what I mean by "primitive" is that the tech we have is only amazing compared to what came before it on this extremely specific world. When compared to the sheer incomprehensible complexity of the universe, or the possibilities it contains... we've achieved nothing yet. Nothing. Yet everyone thinks we know everything and have figured out the deepest mysteries. Ridiculous.

Hm, I hope none of that sounded somehow aggressive. Everything hurts and it's snowing and I'm extra irritable right now. Bah. But that's a topic for another day.

There, now I'm really done.

I didn't find any of it aggressive or irritable. Thank you for taking the time to respond!

And it's my understanding that "unwatch" won't prevent you from being informed of direct replies to your posts but only stop it from informing you of new posts in general. I could be wrong, but that's what I always thought.

 

[Fino]

I'm not questioning Autism as a spectrum. My question is about whether or not Asperger's shows up in the significations of the chart as a less severe form of very severe Autism or whether there are different signifiers for more severe cases. I'm not challenging any paradigms, I just hope to find meaningful relationships in order to be of more help in consultations with parents and adult autists (those who find astrology a reasonable path of personal discovery and inquiry, that is ;-) ) and just understand this very special experience of existence a little better. There are people I love dearly who share the Asperger's experience.

Oh, I see! That makes much more sense.

This statement from your first post is what confused me:

"I consider this a doorway to further study of more severe autistic disorders because I am very curious to see if they really occur on a "spectrum" as the current diagnostic criteria suggest."

 

[SusanLR]

I saw them coming too. Hurry, grow more sunflowers...
If you get the joke fine. If you don't, then you don't play Plants vs. Zombies!

I find it interesting. Will pm you.

 

[Thinx]

This sounds interesting, I m unfortunately not eligible as I am self diagnosed, but good luck with your research. I think there are dare one say, scientific reasons to question the full validity of the autism spectrum idea, it does seem possible that different gene combinations may account for different areas of the current general spectrum, but seems like it's very hard to work out what's going on, particularly as there are over 70 genes already identified as involved and these account for only some of the causes.

Aspergers is behaviourally diagnosed so it's not a fully scientific diagnosis anyway. I don't know enough about Astrology to comment much, but I think it would be odd if we found lots of autistic people clustered in certain sun signs, that's probably not what you are looking for? Also if so it would mean they were all born at the same times of year, which would give rise to other questions I guess.

There's more in the universe than has been dreampt of yet, that's for sure.

 

[Raphael Outcast]

Asperger's is behaviourally diagnosed so it's not a fully scientific diagnosis anyway.

Um.

Well, the Wechsler psychometric test which was a part of my diagnostic assessment was kind of scientific, and actually turned out to be the most useful and informative part of the whole assessment. It didn't involve any actual scans or blood tests or anything, that's true enough. But it did shed a lot of light on the wonky performance of my brain.

And the psychologist carrying out the Wechsler test used an electronic stopwatch, which made the whole thing feel jolly scientific and serious!

 

[Judge]

I have chosen Asperger's or HFA because I have several people in my life with this condition and would like to analyze the correlations between experience, diagnosis and astrological indicators. I consider this a doorway to further study of more severe autistic disorders because I am very curious to see if they really occur on a "spectrum" as the current diagnostic criteria suggest. Is "Asperger's" really a form of "Autism"??

It appears that you are attempting to redefine the DSM-V's Autism Spectrum Disorder using primarily astrological benchmarks. Rather than bother with anyone actually on the spectrum of autism, perhaps it would be in your best interest to take up such a dispute directly with the DSM-V.

After all, we personally have no control over such medical protocols.

I'm sure they'd love to hear from you.

DSM-5

 

[Raphael Outcast]

Well, she's just a student asking in good faith for volunteer subjects for purposes of a dissertation, and I'd be up for it if I could be of any use to someone.

 

[Sunsprawl]

Oh, I see! That makes much more sense.

This statement from your first post is what confused me:

"I consider this a doorway to further study of more severe autistic disorders because I am very curious to see if they really occur on a "spectrum" as the current diagnostic criteria suggest."

Hi Fino,
I completely understand how that might not have been very clear. I find that precise communication through this medium is very time consuming and very few people invest the time necessary (including myself in this case!) Thanks for sticking with me.

 

[Sunsprawl]

It appears that you are attempting to redefine the DSM-V's Autism Spectrum Disorder using primarily astrological benchmarks. Rather than bother with anyone actually on the spectrum of autism, perhaps it would be in your best interest to take up such a dispute directly with the DSM-V.

After all, we personally have no control over such medical protocols.

I'm sure they'd love to hear from you.

DSM-5

Hi Judge,
That would be a fun conversation now, wouldn't it?
I really am not trying to challenge the DSM-5 paradigm, I find the newest definitions in terms of diagnosing Autism in terms of the severity of symptoms very helpful as a structure for my research and general inquiry. What I will do cannot compete or disprove any diagnostic protocol because it is functioning from a different paradigm. I will describe the manifestations of the experience of HF Autists in astrological, not medical or behavioral terms. I find that precise descriptions of planetary configurations can be very therapeutic for an individual trying to understand and process their subjective and perhaps difficult experiences. It certainly has been the case for me. My long term vision for this study is to see if HF Autists have similar configurations to individuals with very severe Autism, but who simply have more severe manifestations. Or astrologically, what makes the difference between the level one of the spectrum and level three? I insist that I am interested in the people and not the diagnosis. I think that it's worth mentioning that when my nephew finally at age 9 received his diagnosis, that in itself was a therapeutic moment. Suddenly there was a very good reason for all of his social challenges and his sense of being so very different from other kids (most especially his outgoing younger brother) and his very significant gifts came out in full relief. He's more confident and happier with his diagnosis than he ever was without it. Thanks for reading!

 

[Judge]

I will describe the manifestations of the experience of HF Autists in astrological, not medical or behavioral terms.

Precisely. However:

Navigating our own condition within the realm of medical science dominated and controlled by Neurotypicals is already difficult enough for us socially, mentally and physically. So now someone wants to introduce a pseudoscience into this delicate equation that negatively impacts us so profoundly and personally.

I can see how this benefits you and your dissertation purely in an academic sense. However what's in it for us?

In this instance, chances are that whatever data you accrue is more likely to compromise our situation rather than open up new scientific horizons for us. We already face numerous obstacles in attempting to enlighten Neurotypicals about Neurodiversity in general. In essence what you are offering may help you, but odds are that it won't help us. Sadly an all too recurring theme I've observed over the last six years in this community.

That if you are sincere about this, don't start with the subject of autism, but rather begin your study with astrology. To bring it to the level of science rather than a pseudoscience. Only then should you come to seek our feedback relative to the pursuit of science. Otherwise you're just potentially compromising our efforts to enlighten the Neurotypical community to gain greater understanding and tolerance of Neurodiverse people.

Don't be the problem. Be the solution.

 

[Raphael Outcast]

I can see how this benefits you and your dissertation purely in an academic sense. However what's in it for us?

What's in it for me is I have Asperger's and I'm into astrology and I've often thought there was a special spark about people with Asperger's which might be explicable in terms of astrology, so I'm all agog, to be honest, and looking forward to the trip. Nobody has to sign up who doesn't want to.

If you are sincere about this, don't start with the subject of autism, but rather begin your study with astrology. To bring it to the level of science rather than a pseudoscience. Only then should you come to seek our feedback relative to the pursuit of science.

What if (and I admit this is far-fetched, but what if) Elizabeth's study were, by revealing something about Neurodiversity, to help demonstrate some potentially genuinely useful and practically applicable aspects of astrology?

Then, her study would simultaneously have consolidated the status of astrology and shed some light on A.S.D.

potentially compromising our efforts to enlighten the Neurotypical community to gain greater understanding and tolerance of Neurodiverse people.

Whilst I can see this might be a concern if the research project were larger, and were going to lead to a feature in a learned psychiatric journal or a ten-part series on B.B.C. Radio 4, in fact this is one student interviewing ten volunteers for a dissertation which, unless it actually does reveal anything significant, will probably never be seen nor heard of outside a small and esoteric circle.

I suffer from crippling anxiety and have even been diagnosed with Paranoid Personality Disorder (not a diagnosis with which I or my G.P. happen to agree), but I see no reason to worry about Elizabeth's dissertation. She has ruffled some feathers with perhaps an infelicitous initial approach but I am a past master at being offended, and she hasn't offended me.

I can see that glib oversimplification and so forth, on the part of Neurotypicals, is a problem to be highlighted and attacked and beaten back, but I don't think we need go into battle over this small misunderstanding.

 

[Judge]

I can see that glib oversimplification and so forth, on the part of Neurotypicals, is a problem to be highlighted and attacked and beaten back, but I don't think we need go into battle over this small misunderstanding.

Stick around here for several years to observe those who so frequently want us to be their lab rats.

You might just adopt a different perspective. And perhaps in the process become more selective and objective about who may or may not impact us in a more positive light.

To seek validation with as little controversy as is possible.

 

[Raphael Outcast]

Stick around here for several years to observe those who so frequently want us to be their lab rats.

Point taken.

But if I wanted some rats in a hurry, I'd start by looking where I knew there'd be plenty of rats.

So long as Elizabeth doesn't actually want to charge people for staring at me, like the Elephant Man, I'll be content to believe her intentions are honourable.

And if we automatically bite every hand that dares to reach out, then what chance of learning about us will the Neurotypicals ever stand?

However, ask me again in five years' time (say) and I might be singing to a tune more like yours. I can see that possibility!

 

[Fino]

I like this person!

 

[Judge]

And if we automatically bite every hand that dares to reach out, then what chance of learning about us will the Neurotypicals ever stand?

That's just it. You don't automatically bite any hand. That with experience you learn which hands are worth ignoring, which ones to indulge, and which ones to bite.

 

[Sunsprawl]

Precisely. However:

Navigating our own condition within the realm of medical science dominated and controlled by Neurotypicals is already difficult enough for us socially, mentally and physically. So now someone wants to introduce a pseudoscience into this delicate equation that negatively impacts us so profoundly and personally.

I can see how this benefits you and your dissertation purely in an academic sense. However what's in it for us?

In this instance, chances are that whatever data you accrue is more likely to compromise our situation rather than open up new scientific horizons for us. We already face numerous obstacles in attempting to enlighten Neurotypicals about Neurodiversity in general. In essence what you are offering may help you, but odds are that it won't help us. Sadly an all too recurring theme I've observed over the last six years in this community.

That if you are sincere about this, don't start with the subject of autism, but rather begin your study with astrology. To bring it to the level of science rather than a pseudoscience. Only then should you come to seek our feedback relative to the pursuit of science. Otherwise you're just potentially compromising our efforts to enlighten the Neurotypical community to gain greater understanding and tolerance of Neurodiverse people.

Don't be the problem. Be the solution.

Hi Judge,
First off, I would like to sincerely apologize if anything I've said has led you to believe I am interested in exploiting you or others in this forum. I get that astrology is not a relevant avenue of inquiry to you and I respect that. I also respect that you clearly are not an interested candidate. I understand that a lot of people like me have come uninvited into this forum and not been helpful or constructive. I truly do not want to be a part of that problem. I came here because I am hoping to have adults with life experience in the study who can tell their story. The story for me is of utmost importance.

I find it strange that you would want me to accommodate my astrological paradigm to a NT dominated paradigm that has great difficulty seeing you and addressing your needs. What if a universe in which astrology works offered a more spacious, inclusive and compassionate space to breathe in than the currently NT dominated scientific one? What if a bigger (how about infinite?) box is what we need to understand human life in general? I am a long time refugee from the medical paradigm that couldn't help me and in fact often directly although unintentionally harmed me. I'm a seeker just like many people here. I am also fallible, anxious, vulnerable...human, with a strong desire to be a part of the solution. I am going about it in the best way that I know, which I understand that for you is severely lacking. I am not anti-science. I love authentic scientific inquiry but also recognize that in this very strange world we live in, it is nearly impossible for true innovation and pioneering thought to actually have a platform and a voice that will reach more than just a select few.

I don't want to argue, I am here with a sincere inquiry that I hope will eventually lead to a deeper understanding of neurodiversity in its manifold manifestations. I hope that this would help disrupt the hegemony of NT reality, which I think would benefit all of humanity in its infinite diversity. Do I feel seen and responded to by this NT reality that is often invoked here? Absolutely not. I think there are a lot of conversations to be had and the more we approach each other as our human selves, the more we can learn, expand and grow and recognize that we have a lot more in common than is different.
All the best to you.

 

[Nervous Rex]

I find it strange that you would want me to accommodate my astrological paradigm to a NT dominated paradigm that has great difficulty seeing you and addressing your needs.

Are you saying that autistic people should reject science because it is "NT dominated"?

At best, this belies a lack of understanding of both ASD's and science. At worst, it is an attempt to manipulate.

 

[Autistamatic]

I will make no comments about the validity of any form of astrology any more than I would someone's religion, but I do believe that you are treading in murkier waters than you know @Sunsprawl and I would counsel you to think very carefully about what you are asking of us.

Before you can ask the questions you suggest you require a much more comprehensive understanding of autism than you currently have. The language you use betrays your naivete and you risk doing harm to an already threatened and marginalised community.