L.A. Times Columnist Says Geek-Autism is a Good Thing

rillian writes "Gary Chapman has an interesting take on the geekness-autism connection in his Digital Nation column in the Los Angeles Times: So what? Some of us are offended by this connection because it makes us even less normal, but he points at the opposing point of view: that the concerns of 'normal' people can be shallow and don't advance civilization. We need more Edisons, not more pop stars."

Comments

Re:a potential "bad" thing about it

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds eerily familiar... the sheer agony of 6 of detention in grammar school (it's 6 years in my country). I could read and write before I went there, and simple arithmetic was clear after one explanation. Six years they spend teaching the kids how to read and write and do simple arithmetic. Six years I spent there every single day 'learning' stuff I already knew, bored to death and extatically happy when I could finally go home and learn something.

I left that school having learnt nothing at all, least of all social skills as the only social interaction I knew was psychological warfare. Them humiliating me over my nerdiness, me humiliating them with their 'stupidity', or trying to anyway. Actually humiliating people requires some social skills. I couldn't do it.

Highschool was a similar story. Bored to death, because I didn't do a thing at school, but also stressed almost to insanity, as I discovered I could no longer pass exams without studying for them. I passed my time studying 'how to become cool'. I concluded that it must involve vandalising stuff, defying orders and insulting people, because that was what the cool kids appeared to be doing most of the time. I spent my time doing that, which was entertaining, but did not gain me any cool at all.
Oh well, I could still comfort myself with the thought that I would have excelled if only I had worked harder.

Then University was a disaster. I had become physically incapable of paying attention to what other people say, especially professors. Having to work for something makes me feel stupid and talentless now. I see many of the people, who used to taunt me in grammar school because I was on a different intellectual plane than they were, excell where I fail. The worst thing is they turn out to be real likeable, interesting people now, who know a lot of interesting stuff and can make an interesting conversation.

All I have to show for my so called brilliance is the fact that I could write complex self modifying code in assembly when I was 13, but besides aquiring some arcane knowledge I haven't done a single interesting thing in the past decade and a half.

I wish I had realised I had a problem when I was a kid, and that I, having a form of autism could not learn social skills without special help. I would not have had to learn them now that I'm almost 30, and I might have been a nicer person for the people around me, and especially for myself.

My article about Asperger's syndrome and geeks

[gary_latimes]

Many thanks for all the fascinating and very informative replies about my column in The Los Angeles Times this morning, about Asperger's syndrome and "geeks."

I want to point out that while I did discuss a *possible* link between this syndrome and the stereotype of computer geeks, this is controversial (which I tried to point out), speculative, and subject to a zillion different interpretations. I did mention that it's not necessary to have any kind of mental syndrome or specific personality trait to be successful with computers; indeed, I know many first-rate programmers and hardware engineers who have none of the qualities associated with Asperger's syndrome or any other identifiable syndrome. I said that some people who have this syndrome, or who may have it in a mild form, may simply be attracted to computers as a field of work. Of course, the idea of a "mild" form of a mental syndrome is controversial in itself. We're talking about the human brain, the biggest mystery in the world.

I didn't mention this in the article, but it's controversial about how common Asperger's syndrome is too, although the ballpark figure seems to be somewhere between 1 in 500 to 1 in a thousand, which seems to me pretty high. So even if this syndrome has no connection at all to computer professionals, there may be a lot of syndrome examples among us.

I didn't know about the opinions of / participants regarding Thomas Edison. :-) I probably could not have mentioned Tesla, anyway, since too few people in the general public have ever heard of him. Anyway, Edison is sometimes mentioned as a figure of the past who seems to fit the Asperger's syndrome picture -- Emily Dickinson, too, by the way. (Most Asperger's syndrome patients are male, however.)

I tried to mention (and close with) the "geek's perspective," which is probably shared by many non-geeks as well: this syndrome stuff doesn't really matter. We all have a complex mix of genetic, environmental and historical inputs into our consciousness and personalities, and we all fall somewhere on a very wide spectrum of human behaviors. In terms of human ecology, each person certainly must have a role in the total story of the species.

-- Gary

gary.chapman@mail.utexas.edu

"Fear, fire, foes, Awake!"

[Signal 11]

I'm really getting tired of major news organizations slapping another label on "the geek phenomenon". Why don't you people just tell the truth - we're now a necessary resource and you're trying to make excuses up so you can exploit us. You're trying to convince all of us that being "geeky" is good. 10 years ago it wasn't. 50 years ago it wasn't... a thousand years ago it wasn't. What changed? We have something you want.

I'm sick of the labelling. I'm sick of saying that geeks are autistic, that we're super-intelligent but socially inept. I'm sick of having the legions of psychologists say that we all have ADD or ADHD. All of it is a coverup - the truth is we think. It's that simple! Because we think, we are different, and because we are different we are ejected from society.

Wake up! Our schools are engaged in an intensive effort to weed out geeks and outcasts. Our politicians are shouting for additional controls and monitoring of us. All eyes are on us. We are under attack! Fear, fire, foes, awake!

--

Re:"Fear, fire, foes, Awake!"

[Wah]

Who, slow down there, Sig.

From someone who's website starts "Welcome, now go away" where do you get off saying you've been ejected by society. The biggest reason for that is the "I think better than you, therefore I AM better than you." philosophy. Which, BTW is the exact same as the "I can beat you down, so I WILL beat you down." philosophy. Geeks as a whole are VERY arrogant and the vast majority of people don't go for that, at all. As a matter of fact it causes people to shun you, and cast you out of their social circles. Much of this the article was discussing, just giving a reason for a phenomena. Add to that a bit of paranoia "All eyes are on us. We are under attack!" and you get a social outcast.

I see more of this as accepting of the geek culture. A culture based in thought, not physical action. (this thread is Katz's wet dream) Where people are judged (given Karma :) based solely on the ability to express thought through a counting machine, across some wires, and around the world. As more people come to realize the worth of this action, more will realize the worth, socially, of "geeks". Also, if you happen to believe in the real-world notion of karma, all the negativity you are spewing forth is bound to come back and bite you in the ass.

Just chill out a bit, go get yourself one of those super-cool Athlons.(and don't take this as a personal attack, it isn't, just some observations that your comments brought to the fore)

Autism consistent with our communications

[Chris Johnson]

Bruce, do some research, OK? Careful with the judgement calls.
The net is a boon for the 'way of being' known as autism/Asperger's. We (I speak for myself and some others) do not cope well with disruptions of our mental 'flow'. We can lock into really hardcore degrees of concentration that lift eyebrows, but it's like jet-lag to be distracted or derailed from this pressured focus.
I'm gonna ask, how many geeks work and geek out at night? How many do it so intensely that they have trouble managing normal sleep schedules and tend to consistently stay up until dawn or later?
I do, and I know some of the reasons why I 'jack in' to my net data sources so intensely at night. It's because there's no other stimulus going on, and no likelihood of being distracted and derailed, and this has everything to do with my having Asperger's.
That said, net data is a very _narrow_ bandwidth. It's language- Asperger's people are very _very_ good at language, so that's no trouble- it's accessible at one's own pace, and you control its flow.
Now, contrast this with the social thing. I've studied enough that I can get a sense of what I'm missing here- for years it was just like I was on Mars, or _from_ Mars, and I had no idea. I'll illustrate with a next-door neighbor thing...
I'm hanging out with Foo. I've always been able to do that- one on one is OK, not too much of a strain. Suddenly, Bar and Baz come over. I like Bar but not Baz, Foo likes Baz but not Bar, and I owe Baz money while Bar is trying to get me to program something for him and is being extra nice. As a side note, Foo hates people being wheedling and whiny. That's the terrain (and shockingly simplified, really.)
In the next fifth of a second, Bar's eyebrows will go up as he looks at me, and Foo's mouth will tighten, while Baz's mouth will also tighten in sympathy, but not as much. Given that Bar is probably going to wheedle me while in Foo's territory, what is the likelihood of me getting yelled at, and what degree of attention and priority should I give to Foo, Bar and Baz?Discuss. ;)
Normal people do this all the time. It's a form of intelligence or perhaps instinct that the majority of people have very well developed. They spend huge amounts of time in social situations this complex or more so, effortlessly decoding and computing their reactions as easily as I decide to use a series of overlaying tiled heightmaps based on series of primes in a program... and to me and to other sufficiently autistic people, this is just as incomprehensible as my coding would be to them.
This is what 'social' means in practice. Talking to people with language online through text is different. There is nothing that says that autistic people hate communicating- it's just that if the average social thing is _that_ hard to do, how surprising is it that autistic people can't deal with it? Also we tolerate solitude a lot better than most people- another hidden advantage.
Bruce, you're great, you rule- your help with the Corel thing was terrific. Please don't take the wrong step here. You don't know the whole story, and very likely you don't have to- if you aren't autistic, trust me, you don't want it- it's too different and your life would be unrecognizably different, incomprehensibly so. However, 'we' are as much autistic as we are not- there is no requirement, but the nature of computerdom _draws_ the autistic, and those with Asperger's, because it is a mode of being in which our strengths can shine and our limitations are not so relevant.
Please do not say 'we (computer geeks) are not autistic'. Without meaning the slightest harm you are walling off a whole class of people who are mostly not well equipped to speak up for their own rights. My own sporadic outbursts draw more from adeptness with written language and a lasting fascination with the subject. I suggest that if you haven't studied it as seriously, then you might be well qualified to speak on computers and geeks and open source, but you may have no particular qualifications on specifically geek autism.
Being autistic is both alienating and alienated, but you have to understand that it's not a conscious pose or act of rebellion- it is the product of great difficulty in handling the horrendously overwhelming flow of nonverbal signals and balances of personality in interpersonal communications.
I'll talk to my next door neighbors- on _my_ turf, where I can act from a position of ease and ability. If my neighbors had computers and AOL and wanted to come over and talk about the latest Microsoft active web technologies, I'd be just as inadequate as if they were talking hockey or Spice Girls. Their being acquainted with computers would _not_ make them a person like me, or make me able to interact on their level...

Autism not consistent with our communications

[Bruce Perens]

For autistics, we sure do spend a lot of time on IRC, Slashdot, with publications, and in general just talking to each other. The fact that we do not do it face-to-face has to do with our geographicaly distributed nature. We'd be talking to our next-door neighbors if they had the slightest concept of what we do.

We are both alienating and alienated, but not autistic.

Bruce

Autism and 'normal'

[Thagg]

My 2 year old son was recently diagnosed as possibly autistic, and while it's a terrifying diagnosis -- articles like this are heartening in a couple of ways. First, they show how broad a spectrum of behavior the world 'autism' now encompasses -- you can be called autistic and really be not terribly disabled. The second comforting thing is that people who are 'not normal' can still be capable, self-sufficient people.

I am not hung-up on 'normal', I think it is more of a curse than a blessing in this world and the one of the future -- I'm definitely looking forward to what our Thomas is going to do as he grows.

thad

Geeks not normal? Who is?

[Jack William Bell]

This isn't news really, but it is a well written article. The real interest I have in this is the insistance, even among researchers who should know better, that some people are 'normal' and others deviate from that normalcy in some way. In this case by having a 'mild form of Asperger's syndrome'. One scientist mentioned in the article even goes so far as to discount the idea on the basis of the fact we Geeks are not horribly impaired. Meaning we are normal I guess...

So, just what is normal? I used to wonder that a lot when I was a kid, because I knew for a fact I wasn't 'normal'. I even wondered if I smelled different from everyone else in some way, although the truth was simply that I could not socialize in the same manner other kids did -- and had an intuitive understanding of math, could read at a college level and had a better volcabulary than my teachers. These simple facts were enough to isolate me; an isolation so common among geeks that we have already discussed it at length here on /.

The thing is, I have come to understand that none of the other kids were 'normal' either! They were just better at pretending. At picking up the little cues that control flocking behavior in the schoolyard. Inside most of them were wondering the same thing I did, and hoping like hell they didn't have to go through the hazing I lived with on a daily basis. Those few who felt no doubts at all probably lacked the intelligence and imagination it takes to see yourself as the victim, or else they were true sociopaths. Doubt what I am saying? Talk at length with your spouse or your 'normal' siblings...

So, what is normal? Aren't we all really part of a continuum? On the one hand you have highly disfunctional people who cannot even feed themselves and on the other you have highly socialized individuals who -- as they are often lawyers, salesmen, politicians and actors -- don't really contribute that much to society themselves. The rest make up the middle of the bell curve, and those of us blessed with an ability to concentrate to extremes, remember seemingly inconsequential details and avoid wasting time with dumb stuff like style and appearance are the prime movers of the new era.

Geeks of the world unite! You have nothing to loose but your propeller beanies!

More seriously, perhaps the real need here is to avoid discussions of 'normal' versus geek and focus more on ways each person can maximize their effectiveness in the world. For some of us this means computers and programming, our natural skills and inclinations make us good at it. Others are particuarily good hairdressers. We are each born with a mix of talents and abilities that, together, make up our IQ. The really good thing about being a geek, and this I know from personal experience, is that we can actually apply many of the traits that make us what we are to becoming good at the other stuff if we decide it is important enough. I once took the time to seriously study body language, basic psychology and public speaking. Now I have those skills when I need them, even if I choose not to exercize them most of the time...

Jack

Re:Sounds familiar

[Hobbex]

I can just see it now, the nervous parents waiting in a doctors office. A doctor steps in through the door with a serious face and clipboard full of readings:

doctor: I believe I have some difficult news,
mother: oh god..
doctor: the tests are in and it looks like your child is going to a...
father: It can't be!
doctor: I'm afraid so, it will be a geek, no doubt about.
mother: oh god...
father: But, this can't be..
doctor: I'm afraid..
father: But I was varsity football, my wife was a cheerleader. I never touched a compute...
mother: We took precautions, they said it couldn't happen.
doctor: Sometimes it just happens, thats all. There was nothing you could have done.
father: Is it bad?
doctor: I'm afraid so. The reading is one of the highest I have seen. We are talking a /. Karma of 100+ and patches to the Kernel class of geek here.
mother: oh god...
doctor: Of course, we understand if you choose not to take on the burden of raising such a child...


-
/. is like a steer's horns, a point here, a point there and a lot of bull in between.

Normal a mild form of Retardation

[Think about it]

Have you ever noticed how normal people are mildly retarded.