“Autistic People are Better at Seeing Through BS – Fact”
I have seen this sentiment being shared widely on a meme on social media. This view, or some variant of it, has been expressed many times by many people. It’s a fairly common view that a significant number of autistic people express, and which the wider community - autistic or otherwise - either passively accept or simply refuse to actively contest. I can see how the view of having some special power or insight can boost the confidence of people who have ASC. People who are often vulnerable and suffering in isolation will respond positively to anything that makes them feel better about their ‘difference.’
But is the view true?
I think there is a truth in the view. Living on the outside or on the margins yields a certain objectivity that innoculates you the common norms and prejudices shared by those who are more successfully socialised.That in itself doesn't indicate the possession of a superior insight, it merely means that you don't share conventional norms and understandings.
It does little for your popularity! There was a time when my first reaction to others’ nonsense - or what I perceived clearly to be nonsense - was to call it out, very loudly and in the most forthright terms. I became noted for being somewhat outspoken, for the reason that I tended to see ‘nonsense’ everywhere - whenever most people opened their mouths.. Another way that this meme could be phrased is to say that “Autistic people are worse at ‘joining in’ and sharing the stories of others. Living outside of ‘normal’ society and its ‘conventional wisdom,’ autistic people develop an independence in their modes of thinking, living, and acting, even when having to depend on others for help negotiating social existence. The meagre help that is normally offered does not incline a person towards compromise at all, the very opposite. That independence is premised on a degree of separation, distance, and remove with respect to social connection, meaning that the time, practices, and habits most people normally invest in reproducing common patterns of socialisation doesn’t necessarily take place with an autistic person. You tend to be ‘The Fool on the Hill.’ 'He can see that they're the fools ...' It’s not that you are anti-social but that you have become accustomed to doing things your own way, at your own pace, in your own place and space. That causes difficulty when you seek to ‘join in’ with others, having to adjust to ‘normal’ modes of social intercourse and exchange. A big stumbling block is others’ thoughts, which tend to be tuned in to a society at which you stand at some strange angle. You make the effort to converse and communicate – and believe me, it is an energy draining effort! – only to find that you are frequently saying things that others don’t understand, expressing views that others don’t share, and advancing opinions which upset others’ ‘truths.’ This should be no cause of surprise. People who have nurtured their views at a degree of separation from successfully socialised others will tend to have views that are out of kilter with those prevailing in wider society and which are often beyond the pale. Whenever autistic people do manage to find themselves in the company of others, they can struggle to find the common communication ground that is shared with others. You find that you frequently speak beyond the social boundaries, placing you in awkward social situations, the very thing autistic people try to stay clear of.
In my younger days, when I had close family to fall back upon and a safe space to hide in, I would speak freely and openly, others’ reactions be damned. I saw myself as being honest and truthful when launching views that were ‘controversial’ and upsetting. ‘But it’s the truth!’ I would insist, against people objecting to my tone. That assertion reveals a source of the difficulty – it denotes the tendency to see human others as things and truth as coldly objective and impersonal. It's like poking people in the forehead, very hard, and telling them to accept the truth. They tend not to like it and tend not to listen. In fact, they tend to push back. Most odd, that. Human beings always baffle and disappoint truth-tellers. It’s an approach I see too many in politics repeating, as in the oafish assertion that ‘facts trump feelings.’ They may well do, but it all depends. In all things, you should only seek such precision as the subject-matter permits. And human beings are the most imprecise creatures of all, combining both subjectivity and objectivity. Being better at ‘seeing through B/S’ can tend also to mean being crude, rude, boorish, arrogant, and conceited, ‘telling the truth’ regardless of social situation, whether people want to hear it or not. This is not praiseworthy, but can be evidence of a social cack-handedness, an arrogance and an elitism, and an inhuman indifference to others’ feelings that is socially inept. I see these traits at work so clearly in politics today precisely because I have seen them at work close-hand in personal interrelations. Over the years I have learned to maintain a diplomatic silence. But even here, when saying little or nothing, people can tell that you think little of their views, causing them to withdraw.
I can’t date precisely when I first became aware of being a contrarian. When you have a certain character you tend to just ‘know’ the way you are and think it normal. Most awareness on my part came as a result of awkward situations in relation to others. Others would say and do things differently to my good self, which in time led to pondering that there may be something more different about me than there is about them. And 'they' have the numbers on their side. There are simply many more of them than there are of you. That they do things the same way and say the same things leads you to draw the conclusion that it is possibly you who may be out of step.
I remember being called a ‘non-conformist’ at school. I became aware of having views and ways that were different to most others. I can ‘see through’ the thoughts and practices of others. But this observation needs to be qualified along the lines adumbrated above. Because another way of saying ‘seeing through’ the views of others is simply being detached from the company of those socialised others and hence not sharing their views. Much that you are inclined to dismiss as B/S are the social niceties and conventions that draw and hold people together. There is nothing intrinsically praiseworthy about abusing such things as ‘B/S.’ It all depends. I think the problems come when small talk is inflated and extended to become big talk in politics and ethics, when people make big statements which make large claims on the loyalties and commitments of others. These I will call out. I've been involved in politics for the best part of a quarter of a century. I have now, finally, quit in complete frustration at the cult-like mentality that political activism fosters. I was loyal but critical in my years of political activism, offering friendly correctives to views I thought plain wrong whilst being broadly supportive. I refuse to support positions that I hold to be mistaken, misguided, and frankly dangerous. Noting that my support was assumed and my criticisms ignored I decided to become more vocal in contesting certain views. I was interested to see how many political 'friends' actually paid attention to my views, rather than simply took my support for granted. As a result, I was sometimes abused, but more often than not unfriended and blocked without a word, even by ‘friends’ I have known for a decade and more. Whilst this kind of thing can be upsetting, it can also be refreshing and liberating, like lancing a boil. These friends were not friends at all - they are friendly to the views they think you share with them, but not to you. You should never ever betray yourself and your better judgement as a result of misplaced loyalties and the tendencies to conform that come with connection with others. More often than not, those others are friendly to their prejudices and not to you.
In the end, life and its living involves a series of judgement calls, some bigger than others, some so small as to be hardly worth the upset that may be caused. It all depends. Given that people can tend to notice your contrarian demeanour, even when you say nothing, and put a certain distance between you and them, silence is often insufficient to earn you a place at the social table. I have learned to mask and be chameleon-like in social situations, discerning people’s views and framing my own views in such a way as would appeal to them. That approach comes with the danger of becoming all things to all people, at the expense of being everywhere and nowhere yourself. It can also lead people to draw conclusions about you, believing you to share their views, when that is simply not true. People presume agreement rather than appreciate the nuances in the way you express commonality. That is nothing less than awkward when the people of very different views all meet or engage, each expecting you to take their side against different others. It’s at this point that the survival strategy of mirroring and masking fails. That leaves you having to call things as they are, express your views forthrightly, and watching the carefully cultivated social links to others fall away leaving you on the outside again. People can feel betrayed.
My advice is to call out B/S whenever and wherever you see it in those large affairs that make big claims on the lives of others, not least your own. Always bear in mind that you may well be mistaken, especially when you deliberately set out to find support for your views. Read against your prejudices, rather than read to confirm them. Monitor in lesser affairs. Often, there is much greater value in social connection and interaction than there is in ascertaining, asserting, and establishing truth. One of the biggest problems of a world of immediate electronic opinion and exchange is that people can tend to be big game players in little games, and little game players in the big games, making big stands on little issues or in the wrong areas, and no stand at all where it counts. Politics isn’t everything and not every relation with others is about politics. Reduce the social world to power relations and struggles and you will be fighting forever to no end in an unwinnable war. A lesson that I have learned in calling out what I have considered to be the ‘B/S’ of others is that I have also asserted and advanced views which were not only contentious but plain wrong. Cultivating your views at a distance from the society of others can yield a certain objectivity that you are inclined to see as truth - 'your truth.' Distance from the critical check of others can also reinforce prejudices, taking you further and further away from the truth you so rudely assert in social situations. You risk being destroyed in the headlong collision between subjective truth and objective truth that is heading your way. Society doesn't care at all when you are a martyr to your own cause, dying on your own little hill.
In fine, I don’t care for stereotypes. Sharing and reproducing positive stereotypes can come at the price of having to accept the negative ones. I would prefer to take cases on their merits, in social contexts and situations, rather than promote generalisations which contain some truth, but which need added clauses and qualifications to be truly truthful.
As to the quote from Krishnamurti which heads this piece, I have frequently expressed the view that I am profoundly ill-adjusted to the mad mechanarchy of the rationalised, estranged, alienated world that, socially, is ‘the real world.’ It can be lonely on the outside, autism as a social death-sentence indeed. But it can be deadly, too, to be on the inside. The gilded cage that pays so handsomely socially and financially is Weber’s iron cage as a psychic prison. You don’t see the bars on such a cage for the reason that they are on the inside, confining your very subjectivities, suffocating the life out of you. There is another meme which people in the autistic community also share which is also apposite here: “I am still here!” The key term in this phrase is not the ‘still here’ denoting physical survival – a big enough achievement in itself – but the I of the authentic, original, unimpaired, unconformed, uncompromised, pure, free, and untamed self. I remain the urban fox holding onto his brush, which is quite the achievement. It doesn’t make me necessarily right in the calls I make, though. The standards of observation, assessment, and evaluation when it comes to truth are independent of personal character and are accessible to all. But still, if I don’t receive the benefit of social correction via dialogue, I am also less tainted by conventional prejudices and blinders. It’s swings and roundabouts. Just be cautious of losing on both.
