Do most of us have Asperger's or are we just too introverted and freethinking?

[Winston]

I do agree with you about English teachers in Asia though. A lot of them are losers and weirdos.

A lot of people say you're a loser and a weirdo.

Not all are nice down to earth people. A lot of them BS a lot too and act airheadish. But if they can speak in front of a class and teach English in a clear crisp voice, doesn't that make them functioning adults? I know some English teachers in Asia and some are ok but others are weird and airheadish. Some are just eccentric. But some lie and BS a lot and claim that they are getting laid all the time and that it's easy to get sex and that girls are always staring at them with sexual lust, etc. Ask @WorldTraveler, he knows countlesss guys that claim that but when you investigate they have no evidence that they are always getting laid by women, and are full of hot air.

English teachers in Asia tend to deal with lots of females so most of us get some sort of positive attention from the women who are our students - especially if you are a good teacher who is fun and interesting, I don't know if that automatically transfers to getting laid a lot but if you are a good teacher in a university setting where most of the local teachers are boring and robotic. You will get positive attention (at least...)

They are just projecting then. Those who call me a weirdo and loser dont know me and cannot provide a list of logical arguments to support that thesis. There are always haters even if i do nothing wrong. Logical people do not ridicule me or call me a loser. Opinions do not define people. They merely define the labelers as labelers.

I dont know any English teacher who got laid easily from his job. Ghost and xiongmao taught English in China but they didnt get laid from the job. Most guys who say that have no proof and cannot produce any when investigated. Its just a macho guy thing and locker room talk.

Yes some girls in your class could have a crush on you but those girls are usually too young for you and its taboo for teachers to date students in most places.

[hypermak]

But most great philosophers felt alienated and depressed for sure. See all the many examples I gave to HouseMD above. Depressed people have to look deeper for meaning. Happy people do not. Remember the quote about marriage from Socrates?

I don't see where you disagree with me hypermak. Can you specify? Which points exactly did you disagree with me on?

The highlighted bit is where I disagree. Not all philosophers and thinkers were alienated, isolated or outcast personalities. Many, dare I say most of them were just university professors, published authors, with a great deal of reputation. Same could be said for writers, poets, scientists...

Once again, a somewhat dysfunctional personality is not always a sign of genius. And there are lots of geniuses who are far from dysfunctional, in fact owe their success precisely to that blend of intellectual brilliance and ability to be social/business animals.

[yick]

They are just projecting then. Those who call me a weirdo and loser dont know me and cannot provide a list of logical arguments to support that thesis. There are always haters even if i do nothing wrong. Logical people do not ridicule me or call me a loser. Opinions do not define people. They merely define the labelers as labelers.

But you're projecting just as much labelling most English teachers in Asia as 'losers' and 'weirdoes' where's your proof that is the case? Most of them are just ordinary folks trying to earn a living. What makes them any more of a loser than you? Logical people do not go around labelling whole groups of people, with a lot of them coming from different countries and cultures.

I dont know any English teacher who got laid easily from his job. Ghost and xiongmao taught English in China but they didnt get laid from the job. Most guys who say that have no proof and cannot produce any when investigated. Its just a macho guy thing and locker room talk.

Nor do I, I don't think anyone on your forum has told you they have gotten laid 'easily' from being an English teacher.
I am an English teacher and if you try and get laid with your students then you are going to get fired.

Yes some girls in your class could have a crush on you but those girls are usually too young for you and its taboo for teachers to date students in most places.

Yep!

[Winston]

But most great philosophers felt alienated and depressed for sure. See all the many examples I gave to HouseMD above. Depressed people have to look deeper for meaning. Happy people do not. Remember the quote about marriage from Socrates?

I don't see where you disagree with me hypermak. Can you specify? Which points exactly did you disagree with me on?

The highlighted bit is where I disagree. Not all philosophers and thinkers were alienated, isolated or outcast personalities. Many, dare I say most of them were just university professors, published authors, with a great deal of reputation. Same could be said for writers, poets, scientists...

Once again, a somewhat dysfunctional personality is not always a sign of genius. And there are lots of geniuses who are far from dysfunctional, in fact owe their success precisely to that blend of intellectual brilliance and ability to be social/business animals.

But most are. I gave many examples. Can you give me some examples to the contrary? Have you seen all the school of life videos and academy of ideas videos on YouTube? All the philosophers they discuss were not happy well adjusted people. No way.

What's your definition of a great philosopher? Are you talking about popular ones or geniuses? Name a genius who was mainstream. Tesla wasnt. He never even had a girlfriend. Just because someone is successful in business doesnt mean hes a great philosophy or genius. You know that?

[hypermak]

@hypermak
I told you thats your opinion. Not fact. We dont know who Spencer is.

OK, ok. He's just a "new poster" who knows a great deal about publicduende, a poster who left 2 years before he joined, and keeps replying to each and every one of my posts insulting him. That, ironically, started when I mocked @StanfordGuy with the "sheeeet" meme. That's really weird and quintessential trollish behaviour, in my book. But I am not responsible for running this forum, you are, so you call the shots.

Besides i have hundreds of fan letters and quotes calling me wiseton too. I posted 3 or 4 links to them above. So it's very likely that Spencer is speaking honestly when he calls me Wiseton, because many others have as well.

Do you agree with Marcos Zeitola that every guy here in this forum is average intelligence and no smarter than the average American? Which means that no one here has an IQ above 100? Do you agree with that?

Marcos statements contained a lot of flaws, false facts and fallacies. Are you saying you didn't see any of them? You agree with him on everything even when he says things that are 1000 percent wrong as i proved in my long 7 point post above?

In a way we all are "misfits". All with our unique personalities, life experiences and insights on life, romance, work, living abroad, etc. I think it's important to respect everybody's opinions and understand that those opinions are the product of our individual mix of positive and negative life experiences.

I think IQ has very little to do what what we are.

[Winston]

They are just projecting then. Those who call me a weirdo and loser dont know me and cannot provide a list of logical arguments to support that thesis. There are always haters even if i do nothing wrong. Logical people do not ridicule me or call me a loser. Opinions do not define people. They merely define the labelers as labelers.

But you're projecting just as much labelling most English teachers in Asia as 'losers' and 'weirdoes' where's your proof that is the case? Most of them are just ordinary folks trying to earn a living. What makes them any more of a loser than you? Logical people do not go around labelling whole groups of people, with a lot of them coming from different countries and cultures.

I dont know any English teacher who got laid easily from his job. Ghost and xiongmao taught English in China but they didnt get laid from the job. Most guys who say that have no proof and cannot produce any when investigated. Its just a macho guy thing and locker room talk.

Nor do I, I don't think anyone on your forum has told you they have gotten laid 'easily' from being an English teacher.
I am an English teacher and if you try and get laid with your students then you are going to get fired.

Yes some girls in your class could have a crush on you but those girls are usually too young for you and its taboo for teachers to date students in most places.

Yep!

No Yick. You misunderstood me. I never said all or most English teachers in Asia were losers. I said there is probably a mix of some losers and eccentric types. Didn't Marcos said an article claimed that 50 percent of them were Aspies? They tend to be friendly to me superficially, but I don't know them that well.

Either way, the bosses of those English schools have told me that most of the English teachers that apply to work for them are losers and drunkards who show up late for work and get a drunk a lot. In 2004 a lady in Taiwan that ran a chain of English schools said that to me, that most of the English teachers she hired were losers who drank a lot and showed up late for work a lot. Her opinion, not mine. There is also a public perception in Asia that most English teachers are losers or perverts or something. I don't know how true that is. I'm just guessing that there must be some truth to it. The bad apples get the attention unfortunately.

However, that boss in Taiwan was an extremist with warped views. She told me that she thought anyone who didn't work 7 days a week and wanted to have fun in life was a loser and lazy ass. Her belief was that people should not enjoy life, but work 7 days a week, like she does. She actually said that. Some Chinese and Taiwanese do think like that it seems, it's crazy and warped. No one in Europe would say that. Her beliefs seemed insane. So I don't know how credible she was.

[Winston]

MarcosZeitola,
I wouldn't call myself a "contrarian". I think you are thinking of those devil's advocate types who argue just for the sake of arguing. I defnitely am not one of them. Rock is sort of like that though. If you state something argue, he will debate it by citing a little flaw or exception. I don't do that. No way. I hate those types too. They annoy me too. I only argue or debate when I know the material and have some good points that are valid and compelling. I never argue just for the sake of it. You are thinking of the devil's advocate types. I hate those types too.

Perhaps you think that because we disagree on a lot. If you say something I agree with, I will agree with it. For example, I agree that there are many good chess players in Philippines, and said so above. I've seen that so I can agree with you on that. I don't argue for sport. Hell no. I only do so when I have a genuine disagreement. Ask the guys here if I argue for sport. The ones that know me best will say no. Ask guys like Alex (halnovemila) who know me very well in person.

Btw, keep in mind that many geniuses and great writers or philosophers were not popular or famous or recognized in their day. They only became great posthumously after they died. It's hard to predict who will be recognized after they die and who won't. So don't jump to conclusions.

Btw, me and Alex have a lot of deep discussions and have shared our original ideas on things. How many people do you know who have original ideas or theories or explanations that are unique and original? I have some. Very few people do. Especially Asian. Why don't you ask your wife or any intellectuals you know there if they have any original ideas or theories that they formulated on their own? Now THAT is hard to find for sure!

[hypermak]

But most are. I gave many examples. Can you give me some examples to the contrary? Have you seen all the school of life videos and academy of ideas videos on YouTube? All the philosophers they discuss were not happy well adjusted people. No way.

What's your definition of a great philosopher? Are you talking about popular ones or geniuses? Name a genius who was mainstream. Tesla wasnt. He never even had a girlfriend. Just because someone is successful in business doesnt mean hes a great philosophy or genius. You know that?

There are too many to list. Take Immanuel Kant for example, the greatest philosopher of the 18th century (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Kant). The Wikipedia profile says he could not finish his studies and initially worked as a private tutor while developing his philosophical research. By the time he was appointed a Full Professor at the University of Königsberg, he had already published most of his most important works and was a very respected figure in the European thinking circles.

On the modern side, take Slavoj Žižek, by many considered the greatest philosopher alive (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavoj_%C5%BDi%C5%BEek). He is a researcher at a Slovenian University, has scholarly assignments around the world and, despite his strong radical leftwing ideas, nothing from his biography portrays him as having an alienated, weird and awkward personality.

In fact, fun fact, just read on and you'll discover he has been married to an Argentian model Not bad, for a bearded commie!

[Winston]

MarcosZeitola and hypermak:

Two more examples I forgot to mention in the 7 point post above:

8. When I was in Las Vegas I got some Star Trek collector's item from Ebay. The seller was from Montana. He wanted me to call him to discuss shipping it. So I called him. We ended up having a long conversation about politics, people, social culture and everything. He was very impressed and said I was unusually bright. He compared me to Dinesh D'Souza, the right wing Indian American political activist and author and Christian, who is considered very intellectual, and very bright and aware. He was impressed so he decided to send me the Star Trek collectible for free. I felt very flattered.

Stuff like that doesn't happen to average Americans or Asians, that's for sure. Nor does the average American get compared with Dinesh D'Souza either. (You guys know who that is?) That's for sure. So no Marcos, you can't say I'm average and nothing special or different from the norm.

9. In my profile on Couchsurfing and Hospitality Club, there are comments in my profile from hosts who say that I am very outside the box and that they learned a lot of new things about me.

So you see, there is good evidence and testimonials from others that I am intellectual and think outside the box. You can't say that of average mainstream people who only care about surviving and making money and being "popular and trendy and cool" etc. lol. Definitely not. Get real man. Add up all the 9 points above and you will see that I am very unique, more than you know.

Btw, when I say unique, I don't mean things like "unique fingerprints" which everyone has. I mean unique qualities and accomplishments. My solution on HA is also unique. No one in the truther movement is promoting it, nor the New Age/self-help industry, nor the mental health industry, nor the weight loss industry, etc.

[Winston]

But most are. I gave many examples. Can you give me some examples to the contrary? Have you seen all the school of life videos and academy of ideas videos on YouTube? All the philosophers they discuss were not happy well adjusted people. No way.

What's your definition of a great philosopher? Are you talking about popular ones or geniuses? Name a genius who was mainstream. Tesla wasnt. He never even had a girlfriend. Just because someone is successful in business doesnt mean hes a great philosophy or genius. You know that?

There are too many to list. Take Immanuel Kant for example, the greatest philosopher of the 18th century (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Kant). The Wikipedia profile says he could not finish his studies and initially worked as a private tutor while developing his philosophical research. By the time he was appointed a Full Professor at the University of Königsberg, he had already published most of his most important works and was a very respected figure in the European thinking circles.

On the modern side, take Slavoj Žižek, by many considered the greatest philosopher alive (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavoj_%C5%BDi%C5%BEek). He is a researcher at a Slovenian University, has scholarly assignments around the world and, despite his strong radical leftwing ideas, nothing from his biography portrays him as having an alienated, weird and awkward personality.

In fact, fun fact, just read on and you'll discover he has been married to an Argentian model Not bad, for a bearded commie!

Dude. Have you tried reading Kant? His books are not readable. Normal layman cannot read them. But normal layman can read Nietzsche or Schopenhauer or Plato. Plus what did Kant accomplish? What were his new ideas? He rejected God but had no explanation to replace him to explain the universe. His concepts like "categorical imperative" don't make sense and aren't understandable to most people. Nor do they apply to the real world. Way too abstract. Most people would find his words meaningless.

I don't know that second guy above. How can he be great? He's a communist, exactly what's in trend now at universities. Leftism and marxism have hijacked academia. Didn't you know that? Of course communist authors will be praised. But he is going with the trend, not going against it. What's so great about that? Most university professors are leftists and socialists nowadays. Nothing special. What new ideas does this guy have? I've never even heard of him. No one here likes Communists and Atheists. They are full of obvious lies that even a 5 year old would reject, such as:

- Science has proven that God doesn't exist and isn't necessary to explain the origin of life or the universe.
- A good God who is all powerful would not let good people suffer on Earth. Therefore God doesn't exist. Atheism is right and the ultimate highest truth.
- All people and races and genders are equal. No such thing as race. There are no inherent differences.
Etc.

They all go against logic and human nature. If you told a 5 year old child that his dad was bad or neglectful and therefore he doesn't exist and never existed, would he buy it? Of course not. Even a 5 year old isn't stupid enough to believe that. Furthermore, if you told a 5 year old child that he had no parents and was created in a mud pool when random chemicals mixed together, would he believe it? Of course not. Even a child knows that's BS and would not buy it. Even cavemen would not buy something that absurd. Yet leftist atheist university professors with Ph D's believe these things are all facts and proven by science! Go figure! How can educated professors believe in stuff that's dumber than dumb, negative 1000 dumb, which even children would not believe? lol. Just goes to prove how delusional and crazy academia has become when they parrot obvious lies and take them seriously and even cite them as fact. lol. It's just like telling a normal person to believe that Microsoft Windows was created by monkeys typing random keystrokes in the source code with no intelligent programmers. lol. No one would buy that, yet university professors who are hip and trendy and leftist and atheist do?! LOL LMAO!

Sorry for going off topic. But you need to look at the bigger picture.

[hypermak]

Dude. Have you tried reading Kant? His books are not readable. Normal layman cannot read them. But normal layman can read Nietzsche or Schopenhauer or Plato. Plus what did Kant accomplish? What were his new ideas? He rejected God but had no explanation to replace him to explain the universe. His concepts like "categorical imperative" don't make sense and aren't understandable to most people. Nor do they apply to the real world. Way too abstract. Most people would find his words meaningless.

I don't know that second guy above. How can he be great? He's a communist, exactly what's in trend now at universities. Leftism and marxism have hijacked academia. Didn't you know that? Of course communist authors will be praised. But he is going with the trend, not going against it. What's so great about that? Most university professors are leftists and socialists nowadays. Nothing special. What new ideas does this guy have? I've never even heard of him. No one here likes Communists and Atheists. They are full of obvious lies that even a 5 year old would reject, such as:

- Science has proven that God doesn't exist and isn't necessary to explain the origin of life or the universe.
- A good God who is all powerful would not let good people suffer on Earth. Therefore God doesn't exist. Atheism is right and the ultimate highest truth.
- All people and races and genders are equal. No such thing as race. There are no inherent differences.
Etc.

They all go against logic and human nature. If you told a 5 year old child that his dad was bad or neglectful and therefore he doesn't exist and never existed, would he buy it? Of course not. Even a 5 year old isn't stupid enough to believe that. Furthermore, if you told a 5 year old child that he had no parents and was created in a mud pool when random chemicals mixed together, would he believe it? Of course not. Even a child knows that's BS and would not buy it. Even cavemen would not buy something that absurd. Yet leftist atheist university professors with Ph D's believe these things are all facts and proven by science! Go figure! How can educated professors believe in stuff that's dumber than dumb, negative 1000 dumb, which even children would not believe? lol. Just goes to prove how delusional and crazy academia has become when they parrot obvious lies and take them seriously and even cite them as fact. lol. It's just like telling a normal person to believe that Microsoft Windows was created by monkeys typing random keystrokes in the source code with no intelligent programmers. lol. No one would buy that, yet university professors who are hip and trendy and leftist and atheist do?! LOL LMAO!

Sorry for going off topic. But you need to look at the bigger picture.

I don't understand. So you're singling out the few philosophers who had a socially dysfunctional life and saying that they are the only ones who deserve to be called "philosophers" or "thinkers"? Isn't that even more partial?

Philosophy is not just a bunch of deep thoughts about life, the universe and God. It's not a man's opinion on why modern Western girls are a bunch of degenerates, uttered between two pints of lager in a casual pub conversation. Philosophy is systematic research, a discipline that thrives in the same contexts as any other scientific discipline: academia, journals, seminars, peer reviews, etc. It might be less exciting than a nice, casual chat on spirituality and the meaning of human existence had with a fellow layman, in layman's language, but it is what it is.

Yes, there is a saying that European academic circles have long been taken over by the leftwing, and that is partially true, at least since the cultural revolution in the 60s and 70s. Yet, I think the spectrum of philosophical thinking is larger and more varied than just a bunch of marxists.

[yick]

No Yick. You misunderstood me.

No I did not!

I never said all or most English teachers in Asia were losers.

Yeah you did!

I said there is probably a mix of some losers and eccentric types. Didn't Marcos said an article claimed that 50 percent of them were Aspies? They tend to be friendly to me superficially, but I don't know them that well.

This is what you said.

I do agree with you about English teachers in Asia though. A lot of them are losers and weirdos. Not all are nice down to earth people. A lot of them BS a lot too and act airheadish. But if they can speak in front of a class and teach English in a clear crisp voice, doesn't that make them functioning adults? I know some English teachers in Asia and some are ok but others are weird and airheadish. Some are just eccentric. But some lie and BS a lot and claim that they are getting laid all the time and that it's easy to get sex and that girls are always staring at them with sexual lust, etc. Ask @WorldTraveler, he knows countlesss guys that claim that but when you investigate they have no evidence that they are always getting laid by women, and are full of hot air.

Either way, the bosses of those English schools have told me that most of the English teachers that apply to work for them are losers and drunkards who show up late for work and get a drunk a lot. In 2004 a lady in Taiwan that ran a chain of English schools said that to me, that most of the English teachers she hired were losers who drank a lot and showed up late for work a lot. Her opinion, not mine. There is also a public perception in Asia that most English teachers are losers or perverts or something. I don't know how true that is. I'm just guessing that there must be some truth to it. The bad apples get the attention unfortunately.

A lot of those bosses, especially of Taiwanese buxibans are crooks and incompetent and are happy (like you state in the last paragraph) to exploit English teachers working for them with their annoying micromanaging ways and if anyone stands up to them and complains then they're 'losers' f**k them! They are hardly character references when they are lacking in most basic standards of decency, they have yet to realise that if you treat your employees badly then they won't put in their best efforts.

Of course, not every boss is an arsehole and yes, some teachers are drunkards and have no qualifications but the bosses of these schools employ those teachers even if they have the simple qualification of having blond hair or being young - they will hire Poles and Ukrainians and get them to tell the student body they are from Canada - lots of buxiban bosses in Taiwan are scumbags and they aren't any kind of character reference at all.

However, that boss in Taiwan was an extremist with warped views. She told me that she thought anyone who didn't work 7 days a week and wanted to have fun in life was a loser and lazy ass. Her belief was that people should not enjoy life, but work 7 days a week, like she does. She actually said that. Some Chinese and Taiwanese do think like that it seems, it's crazy and warped. No one in Europe would say that. Her beliefs seemed insane. So I don't know how credible she was.

Exactly!

[HouseMD]

But most are. I gave many examples. Can you give me some examples to the contrary? Have you seen all the school of life videos and academy of ideas videos on YouTube? All the philosophers they discuss were not happy well adjusted people. No way.

What's your definition of a great philosopher? Are you talking about popular ones or geniuses? Name a genius who was mainstream. Tesla wasnt. He never even had a girlfriend. Just because someone is successful in business doesnt mean hes a great philosophy or genius. You know that?

There are too many to list. Take Immanuel Kant for example, the greatest philosopher of the 18th century (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Kant). The Wikipedia profile says he could not finish his studies and initially worked as a private tutor while developing his philosophical research. By the time he was appointed a Full Professor at the University of Königsberg, he had already published most of his most important works and was a very respected figure in the European thinking circles.

On the modern side, take Slavoj Žižek, by many considered the greatest philosopher alive (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavoj_%C5%BDi%C5%BEek). He is a researcher at a Slovenian University, has scholarly assignments around the world and, despite his strong radical leftwing ideas, nothing from his biography portrays him as having an alienated, weird and awkward personality.

In fact, fun fact, just read on and you'll discover he has been married to an Argentian model Not bad, for a bearded commie!

Dude. Have you tried reading Kant? His books are not readable. Normal layman cannot read them. But normal layman can read Nietzsche or Schopenhauer or Plato. Plus what did Kant accomplish? What were his new ideas? He rejected God but had no explanation to replace him to explain the universe. His concepts like "categorical imperative" don't make sense and aren't understandable to most people. Nor do they apply to the real world. Way too abstract. Most people would find his words meaningless.

I don't know that second guy above. How can he be great? He's a communist, exactly what's in trend now at universities. Leftism and marxism have hijacked academia. Didn't you know that? Of course communist authors will be praised. But he is going with the trend, not going against it. What's so great about that? Most university professors are leftists and socialists nowadays. Nothing special. What new ideas does this guy have? I've never even heard of him. No one here likes Communists and Atheists. They are full of obvious lies that even a 5 year old would reject, such as:

- Science has proven that God doesn't exist and isn't necessary to explain the origin of life or the universe.
- A good God who is all powerful would not let good people suffer on Earth. Therefore God doesn't exist. Atheism is right and the ultimate highest truth.
- All people and races and genders are equal. No such thing as race. There are no inherent differences.
Etc.

They all go against logic and human nature. If you told a 5 year old child that his dad was bad or neglectful and therefore he doesn't exist and never existed, would he buy it? Of course not. Even a 5 year old isn't stupid enough to believe that. Furthermore, if you told a 5 year old child that he had no parents and was created in a mud pool when random chemicals mixed together, would he believe it? Of course not. Even a child knows that's BS and would not buy it. Even cavemen would not buy something that absurd. Yet leftist atheist university professors with Ph D's believe these things are all facts and proven by science! Go figure! How can educated professors believe in stuff that's dumber than dumb, negative 1000 dumb, which even children would not believe? lol. Just goes to prove how delusional and crazy academia has become when they parrot obvious lies and take them seriously and even cite them as fact. lol. It's just like telling a normal person to believe that Microsoft Windows was created by monkeys typing random keystrokes in the source code with no intelligent programmers. lol. No one would buy that, yet university professors who are hip and trendy and leftist and atheist do?! LOL LMAO!

Sorry for going off topic. But you need to look at the bigger picture.

Socrates, Plato, Camus, Descartes, and I could go on and on, were philosophers with many close friends, active social lives, and the ability to be effective communicators. Tesla was a scientist, not a philosopher. Some philosophers are lonely or socially awkward, but there are a many that are not, as philosophers are people and people can be introverted or extroverted, lonely or loved. Often the picture painted in YouTube videos (yikes if that's where you're getting your philosophy) is sensationalized with regard to the lives and times of famous figures, making them seem excessively tragic or grand, when in fact primary sources in the literature will tell you otherwise. One could paint Socrates, for instance, as a loathed man, which he was in some circles, but in his own he was beloved and surrounded by numerous close friends. Plato believed friendship to be so important that he called it the highest form of love.

And I'm sorry you're too unintelligent to understand Kant, but that does explain your ease of falling for conspiracy theories and the like- you confuse complexity without complication for brilliance, while actual brilliance is often complicated and beyond the layman.

[Cornfed]

In fact, fun fact, just read on and you'll discover he has been married to an Argentian model Not bad, for a bearded commie!

She's nothing to write home about. Middling face, no muscle tone, weird torso, possibly a tranny etc.

[HouseMD]

Asperger's is a real thing but I doubt anyone here has it. Real Aspies have problems relating with people and are extremely awkward. If you can come to this forum and communicate and relate social experiences then you are not an Aspie.

I would tend to agree. That's my gut feeling and hunch as well. But since I don't know much about Asperger's, I'm trying to find out about it and see if most of us have it here, which explains why we are different. I've been wondering for years myself about why I am different from others, even though I never chose to be. It's a big mystery and 64k question. So I'm exploring all possible explanations. This is just one of them. I can't rule it out without looking into it first. That's what good researchers do.

When I was in 4th grade, I was automatically slapped with the label "mistfit/outcast" and treated as such, out of nowhere, without my permission. I swear to God. Since then, I've always wondered why most people in America dislike me and excluded me for no logical reason. Even the "Christians brothers" at church seemed to want to exclude me, albeit politely. Just by asking this kind of question will draw a lot of ridicule and insults of course, but such ridicule does not contain any logical answers or insights or explanations, so they are useless and contain many fallacies too.

@HouseMD is what Repatriate says above true? Or does it only apply to low functioning people on the extreme end of autism?

Why are you guys so obsessed with Aspergers and Autism?

Most introverts are not either one.

I would agree. But some people on the forum, such as the judgmental guys above, seem to use Aspergers as a label that they slap onto anyone they don't like or think is weird or want to shame or ridicule. Thus it's a shaming tactic, typical of judgmental bastards. That's what muddies the waters here. I'm wondering how much of Asperger's is real and how much is just a label and shaming tactic from assholes who like to judge others and put a negative label on them.

In the second page of this thread, someone said that there is neurological evidence that Asperger's is real which can be determinded from a brain scan or catscan. And that this evidence shows that Aspies are neurologically wired differently and have a different brain structure. If that's true then that is objective evidence, not a hate label. What that means is that unless a brain scan shows that I have Asperger's according to objective scientific criteria, then anyone who calls me an Aspie is just a hater who wants to put a label on me to shame me and discredit me and ridicule me, and therefore not credible. Such people are not my real friends of course, but they do exist, even on this forum.

Aspergers is specifically the inability to understand social cues and situations properly. It isn't being poorly socislized, it is an absolute inability to read people without realizing such. It is a neurological problem that is likely due to a lack of mirror neuron functionality. Most awkward or lonely people don't have it. They often have hyperfixations on certain topics and will go on at length about them beyond what would be considered normal or socially acceptable, have difficulty talking about anything other than their interests, and due to this tend to annoy the hell out of people around them. This leads to people avoiding them entirely because they're just irritating to deal with, and due to their lack of social awareness they have no idea why this is occurring.

They often have inflated senses of self-importance and intelligence despite often being less intelligent than average. This inflated sense of intelligence and superiority often leads to frustration on their part when they are not recognized by others, and on the part of others who easily see them for what they are, socially inept hyperfocused individuals that aren't nearly as bright as they think they are.

Are you supremely annoying or do you have Asperger's syndrome? Only a doctor can tell you. But whether it is the former or the latter, I can assure you, old friend, that you are not the clown, but rather the entire circus. One doesn't end up on lolcow wikis because they're some brilliant misunderstood genius.