The Importance of Neurodiversity in Permaculture

Kitty Leith wrote:make small talk,

This is very difficult to learn how to do, in my experience.

Kitty Leith wrote:Whoa! This conversation went way off the rails! To be honest, I just skimmed it because it seemed a little too fraught to examine closely. I've been an unlicensed architect for almost 20 years and I now no longer give a damn about what people want to do with their buildings, even though it's my job to get designs to code and get them permitted. I've learned to let some things go. And let people be responsible for their own health, happiness, and safety. I've totally lost interest in arguing a position on anything as well. I think age has something to do with that, and I love it. I'm also an Aspie. Quite similar to Bonnie:

Not really off the rails, one of the reasons this topic started was due to a perception that a writing style or a lack of credentials or lets call it a modified Aspie would somehow get people to listen to someone such as yourself and me in the building sections. You're not the first one to have this attitude, I'm right behind you, as are many pros. This is why the building industry is such a mess in the USA for one, and other countries. Per international code anyone can design a single family home or duplex, up to three stories. The trend now is to air seal in toxic materials, and somehow fix it with a mechanical ventilation system.

In this community, I have found people with little funds are gun hoe about designing and building their own home without the cost of a professional, or proper training and education. Most have never read the building safety codes or go to a rural area where they are not enforced. Then when someone shows them they know what they don't they can get very disappointed in you for bringing it to their attention, or some may say thanks if your lucky, some want to do nothing but fight with you.

I think it has become clear to me by this thread and closer examination this has nothing to do with being a "Aspie" I don't see myself as one. My writing style won't correct it, nor will my communications, nor will my credentials being made available change anything, as I am sure it has not with you or anyone else that practices it professionally. Probably why unfortunately there are not many if any pros out here giving good free advice, alot of the advice out here can cause serious bodily harm. I find it difficult not to "give a dam" but for my own well being I am seeing it is not me or worth it as much as want to help people, especially ones with little funds since I been there.

Speaking of power figures or influential people that thrive on needy: The other thing I find of interest here is some sites have made a lot of money giving free advice out to people that don't understand free advice may not be the best advice. I know of one green site that started that way until the "adviser (an x-framer non-degreed, no design engineering experience, from Vermont" that pushes alot of sponsored sales got a name now as a "Building Scientist", now you have to pay for the advise which is wrong or not the best due to sponsorships. In this community anyone can start a work and learn seminar, solicit free labor in exchange for perhaps bad building practices the "teacher" may have little experience or education in. On these sites or with this people the biggest battles can come about, even in a proven effort to show they are not correct in what they teach.

I learned a long time ago that you can write about your own experience and that can't be argued with because it's personal -- but about others, to others, sounds audacious, presumptuous, and patronizing; especially if it's unsolicited. I've been observing people a long time and they tend to end up doing what they want to do even if it is solicited, no matter who's advice they seek. If it is solicited, I advise as long as there are receptive ears, but I don't make a practice of validating anybody's half-baked (in my opinion) plans. It's often not really advice they seek - it's validation of their own plans. Knowing that, if I give unsolicited advice I have to ask myself about my own motivation. If it's to sway/correct somebody, then the opposite of what one wants to do is alienate the audience, so I must be cognizant of my own voice. So that's why sometimes a story is more helpful. Like the post I did here, Design as if your life depended on it.

I've also learned that people who want to break the laws made for their own safety will break them anyway. I can try and counsel them, and do, about the risks both economic and life-safety, but those kind of people don't want my counsel. So I do what professional ethics dictates I have to do and where they deviate from that is their choice and their problem. That's beyond my control, so I no longer let what others do upset or frustrate me.

And I agree, I don't think any of this has anything to do with being autistic, though it might seem like a caricature of what people expect an aspie to sound like. Some aspies have an almost borderline sense of right and wrong so things like this can really eat them up. But I think being overly righteous sounding is something everybody does, and it takes some bad experiences to seek other ways.

I strongly take both Kitty's and Terry's points about safe design and building, but I'm not sure if they're right about motivation. It may be the case for some of the people they encounter, and I'm speaking here from my personal experience, and what is going on in my head.

I am never going to have two hundred grand to pay for the services of a qualified architect and a qualified builder. This leaves me with a limited number of choices.

I can find some means of barter with Kitty or Terry, but most architects and most builders prefer to be paid in cash, for reasons that make complete sense to me.
I can remain trapped in my present, to be nice about it, deeply unpleasant situation.
I can live in a caravan (which is fine in the short term, but not ideal when I get old).
I can break the rules, and risk not getting old.

In PermieWorld I'd be able to trade food and so on for architectural and building services, but we don't live in PermieWorld.

I don't think this thread is the place to be discussing solutions, but I wanted to flag up the point that I don't think this is about neurology - or at least not all the time.

That does not mean I wouldn't value Kitty or Terry's input, or pretend my ideas were better, but that I can't afford it.

(Corrected: typo)

Tyler,

Yes - I am missing the small talk gene as well! I know it is code and cultural convention, but seems so inane. Another reason I don't really want to be part of society anymore - the stroking and validating requirements get so old. I'm older and want to be selfish now.

Small Talk

Neither can I! I forgot to add in my reply that I probably have to not build to code in some respect when I finally get to build as well. I will pay for a proper foundation, but everything else I will just rely on my own knowledge.

That being said, I do believe our codes, despite being well-intentioned, cater to the insurance industry. And there is a way of being that isn't accounted for in any code book, and that is maintenance. Vernacular architecture that has lasted centuries is maintained. Some cultures, building maintenance is part of the culture. There was an understanding that nothing lasts forever. Now we pretend like it does and the rules reflect that delusion.


I think owner-builder is fine - I also think everyone can be an architect (but few can do it well). The problem is that most owner-builders don't understand structural principles or the materials they are working with enough. So I would pay for a structural engineer And I would also pay for soils testing by a geotech. Even me, with 20 years of architectural experience. I would at the very least spend a few thousand on these critical consultants and if I couldn't afford that, then live in a trailer.

Also, 200 grand! This is a serious misconception about what design consultants make. Our annual salary is about the same as school teachers. Engineering might cost 2-3 grand, soils report 1-2 grand, Architecture anywhere from 5-up (depending on their fee structure and how decisive the client can be). This notion that designers cost more than the house is a serious problem.

Oops, I see you also included construction in that 200 grand. But still, people think design costs more than it actually does. For building safety, 5-10 grand might cover it, and I think it's worth every penny.

I have two points. One where I agree, and one where I don't.

Mick Fisch wrote:

Why do people like to be looked in the eye?

Most animals, mammals especially, it's a sign of aggression.

I've noticed not all neurotype enjoy eye contact. Some find it down right frightening. Is it a cultural adaptation?

I think it's part of the universal body language. We are constantly assessing, unconciously, and the eye contact is part of what we use to assess. Not making eye contact is essentially withholding information. It appears to me from my limited contacts with people from lots of places, that the eye contact thing is pretty universal. Aggessive intentions are often read pretty well by eye contact. I have six very attractive daughters (no brag, just fact) and I've often heard them, their friends or even their mom say something like "There was something in his eye (or a more general term like, "about him") that made me nervous" after they've been around some guy trying to pick them up. Women may be better at reading body language because they have to be better at it.

I think it's cultural. In parts of Asia, for example, Euro-American rules on eye contact simply don't apply. In Korea, by my understanding, you should not make eye contact with your social superior. The corollary of this, of course, is that your social inferior will avoid making eye contact with you.

I've often wondered if I'd do better in one of these cultures. I know of at least one Aspie who spends most of his time in Japan. I don't know why, but this makes sense.

Mick Fisch wrote:It seems strange to me that some people don't seem to have all of the 'pre-programming' on body language, or just don't pick it up. There are such obvious disadvantages to it that I want to think that it is because there is some cominsurate advantage somewhere. I had an engineer friend of mine (married to a doctor) tell me that if any of a childs grandparents were engineers, the likelihood of Ausbergers in the child went way up. That may indicate that a certain percentage of neurodiversity might be good for a society. While everyone else is off gabbing away, some guy who sees the world a little differently is figuring how to chip flint, inventing an atlatl, inventing the bow and arrow, figuring out how to build a better shelter, doing stuff that may benefit the group. It makes sense to me.

This is pretty much classic Temple Grandin (you use some of the examples she does). There is also good research evidence of assortative mating among Aspies. I think Baron-Cohen is probably wrong about hyper-systemising (this theory may have inadvertently done a lot of damage*) but I think his ideas on assortative mating are sound: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2083102/ summary: http://www.ingenia.org.uk/Ingenia/Articles/343. Of all the women (okay, it's not a long list) I've encountered over the last few months in my own search for my life mate, the one who comes closest to the kind of person I think I could settle down with is an ecology student, with an interest in mycorrhiza, and a diagnosis of Asperger syndrome....

Having said all that, all else being equal, next week I'll be back at the problem of working out how to consistently conceptualise patches in forest garden ecosystems. I'd rather be out on a hot date in the Botanics, but I think I'm more likely to have the company of the National Vegetation Classification for Woodlands.


* I could go into why, but it's well off topic.

Kitty, I agree with alot of what you said....I'd plus 1 ya but I like personal notes better. Neil the 200K for a pro made me laugh! I wish! I think you were meaning the junk they mostly design cost that or more, and I'd agree there is an identified issue with the Architects Schooling that is being looked to better their understanding of building sciences and materials. Most of my bread and butter comes from a different industry right now anyway, Architects have never been paid well. Engineers in general salary has gone way down with alot being outsourced over seas like everything else.

Back to the building forums.......It is interesting when people come here with a complete lack of plans as Kitty said other than what they have burnt into their brain and are hoping for cost wise and DIY. Many times there is no changing it. Motivation - Honestly I learn very little on this site but in answering the questions keeps my knowledge refreshed since I too am getting old and have a short term memory, perhaps the beginning stages or Altimeters? Not that I really understanding it or any of this stuff but it sure is fun trying

So I have already identified a market for low income families and natural methods can fill the need. Where I am at junk mobile homes go for at least $55/SF....There are far better natural methods for less than that. The problem is code that does not recognize them. That is a real issue. The last tornado site I visited in 2014 Pilger, NE a little 5 year old girl had died in a mobile home. Around 200 miles away a strawbale home community still stands in the same climate since the late 18th century. Kitty, you are correct I see alot that will come out here and say " traditional homes" in this time zone are still standing as if they are in some dream world and think that is not because of all the maintenance, or, somehow these natural methods have no maintenance. Those are the same ones selling the BS getting free labor, etc....

What happens in places like Pilger, Moore, OK, is all the contractors know is to put the same deadly lite framing structure back up, Moore OK has killed many the only homes still standing concrete and they still don't get it. If they put the code min wind speed at 250 MPH it kill the wood building industry not people. I have thought of going mobile to these disaster areas since I have a big rig RV, but the other issue is finding local trades that can natural building. In these situations, FEMA is usually there but after clean up contractors can come in a solicit. In Piger there were no building codes and insurance money in most cases (not all) will rebuild. They want to get back into their homes fast, some, others may be willing to do more timely construction since many natural method take more time (drying, etc) It be an excellent opportunity to put groups of people together to help one another rebuild. We have habitat for humanity doing something like that but not natural methods. I like to get this going and kill the mobile home and wood building industry in tornado alley....that is going to take one big battle tho..It takes alot of ones time, I have already started a dialog with my local to adopt more affordable natural methods, it also take money since I have test and prove fire and smoke rating's, etc....at the same time natural home building trying to make this more affordable for everyone else and create change have to eat too.

Sorry if I'm getting off topic.

Terry Ruth wrote:Neil the 200K for a pro made me laugh!

That did include construction. Sorry. I should have made that clear. Here, and I think in the rest of the EU, you can only have your house built by a qualified builder. If you don't, you won't get building permission, and if you don't get building permission they can - and will - come in with the bulldozers. You won't get it built without at least getting an architect to sign off on it first.

Don't get me wrong: there are very good reasons for this (preventing people from building unsafe dwellings and from building in places where it will cause damage to the natural environment (although there are legitimate controversies)), but it does lock the likes of me out of having my own home.

I think we are off topic. Can I steer it back to what we were supposed to be talking about?

The title of this thread is very good, and yes, personally I am all for diversity in permaculture, of thoughts, of knowledge, of personality and so on.

I see that the debate here, is how can we have diversity when there is a right and a wrong way of doing a thing? Well, in terms of building something safely, there can be very little diversity, if you put a heavy roof on spindly timbers then you will wake up buried, if you wake up at all, so in that sense we cannot have diversity of building. There is a safe way, and an unsafe way. I'm sure we would all agree too, that diversity is not good if we talk about using tonnes of chemicals on our plants, this is also a type of diversity that we would wish to exclude.

But I think the title of this thread, was meant to encourage acceptance of diversity in good ways, not to include obviously bad situations in the name of being all-inclusive.

Diversity is good, when it is applied to finding a place for all to flourish, and I think that the principles of companion planting can be applied to people too. Some people are good for each other, put them together and they will flourish. Some people do not do well with certain other types of people, and so they should be in other circles. In permaculture terms, this does not mean that our garden has to exclude any plants, only that we need to be careful in our design. And so too with people, there are no types of people who should be excluded, but people need to find, or be shown, where they do fit in, and where they can flourish.

As for the unfortunate side effect of confidence, which is apparent arrogance, there is only one solution for this, which is learning humility, and that takes a lot of years. But we do need confident people, even if they can seem confrontational, and if we give them time, and the right situation, they will grow and flourish too

Kitty Leith wrote:You know, the world is often discussing how to deal with autistic people but not realizing that, outnumbered, we have to deal with "normal" people to a greater degree just as a function of math! We are stretching to meet social norms each and every day. And it is not easy. But nobody stretches to meet us. What would that require? Maybe slowing down a second and listening? Maybe being a little patient? Maybe looking for positives instead of flaws?

I also don't know how power-hungry controlling ego-centric narcissistic exploitative people came to be thought of us "normal" (and yes, those types exist in the alternative and activist and ecological and organic and permaculture world as well) and we on the autism spectrum came to be thought of us lesser. The world is often an upside-down place.

I'm very glad to read this. Through this whole discussion, which I've been reading through over a few days, it has seemed to me that everyone is focusing on how to communicate better by adapting to the majority. I do understand this is necessary to a degree, and more or less so in certain situations, but I don't like that it's the focus. I also think that, in at least some situations, it would be to everyone's detriment.

I was reading this discussion https://permies.com/t/54718//Estimating-carbon-capture-perennial-crop, and very much enjoying it. Apart from the information, I was specifically enjoying how, I thought, people were able to say "I disagree with you" or "No, you're wrong on that" without anyone getting hurt feelings. I'm going to pick on Neil Layton here because he started the discussion and because I very much admire his writing style and have been paying attention to it. I've noticed that he can write with a certain tone that the average person often associates with aggression or rudeness. Most of the discussion on this thread has been about vocabulary - lay vs. technical, for example - and that can be part of the tone I'm talking about, but it's more than that. It's a bluntness, a lack of coddling - or maybe personal validation would be a better term, as that's been mentioned already. The thing about this tone is that as soon as people encounter it, they decide to take offense. They don't stop to notice that nothing else in the post suggests rudeness - there's no sarcasm, no name calling, no personal attacks at all. If a person can notice that, then they'll realize that the tone they're reacting to negatively is not what they think it is. The bluntness is there to get information across efficiently. And it IS a more efficient and clear way to convey information. This is a communication style that the majority would be much improved by adopting - me included, and I have varying degrees of success. It would be a shame if Neil were to try to adjust his tone to make people more comfortable and lose the wonderful precision and clarity.

I was very disappointed when Burra posted on that discussion, I've been asked to remind people to be nice. It had seemed to me that, even if they did take something personally and got a little bristly for a minute, everyone ultimately understood that the discussion was about information and was able to put aside emotions. Once that warning had been posted, it seemed like the emotions came out even more (publicly anyway) and what had appeared to be a fascinating discussion where people took comments in the spirit in which they were intended turned into a less interesting get defensive and stop talking about the real topic conversation. Or maybe it was just my perception that changed *

In any case, not only do I think cutting out some of the fluff of conversation is conducive to sharing information effectively, I also think it would result in good personal growth for most people. As has been discussed, everyone needs some level of personal validation from others. I think it's often used to enable poor self confidence, however. I also don't think you can be someone's equal if you're constantly needing them to coddle your feelings when they disagree with you. I worry that focusing too much on tailoring one's communication to the mainstream will result in something emotionally and intellectually childish. I would rather see higher standards for us to use as examples, even if we're made uncomfortable or offended sometimes. In most cases, I think it's the responsibility of the majority to understand the minority and build bridges. I know that's not how it works in real life, but...

*I realised after posting that it seems like I'm saying Burra ruined the discussion. that's not what I meant at all. The discussion was obviously not what I thought it was right from the beginning and Burra's post is just a marker for me.

Jan White wrote:it has seemed to me that everyone is focusing on how to communicate better by adapting to the majority.

I mostly gave up on that idea.

Tyler Ludens wrote:

Jan White wrote:it has seemed to me that everyone is focusing on how to communicate better by adapting to the majority.

I mostly gave up on that idea.

Good! I like your posts the way they are!

Jan White wrote:I was very disappointed when Burra posted on that discussion, I've been asked to remind people to be nice. It had seemed to me that, even if they did take something personally and got a little bristly for a minute, everyone ultimately understood that the discussion was about information and was able to put aside emotions. Once that warning had been posted, it seemed like the emotions came out even more (publicly anyway) and what had appeared to be a fascinating discussion where people took comments in the spirit in which they were intended turned into a less interesting get defensive and stop talking about the real topic conversation. Or maybe it was just my perception that changed *

*I realised after posting that it seems like I'm saying Burra ruined the discussion. that's not what I meant at all. The discussion was obviously not what I thought it was right from the beginning and Burra's post is just a marker for me.

I just went through the entire discussion, and I never posted a reminder to be nice.

I posted twice about staying on topic and not wandering into cider press material, and the second one included a reminder not to express opinion as fact. What did happen was that soon after posting the first time, another member joined in the conversation with a strong tendency to post his opinions as fact and dominate the whole conversation in a way that seemed intent on manipulating it to his own ends. I ultimately removed much of that conversation as it was off topic, reminding everyone to take such things to the cider press, and issued the reminder not to express opinion as fact.

But none of that is about neurodiversity or differences of opinion.

I also really enjoy Neils posts. It's always a pleasure to read and full of information.

One thing I appreciate about his style is that he does not assume the reader already knows what he is talking about. When he introduces a complicated topic, he takes a moment to explain what it is. It makes me feel included and that he cares enough about the topic to welcome newcomers to the conversation. My academic side appreciates this because there is so often equivocation when people from different backgrounds use words and phrases.

Equivocation is when the same word or phrase is used to mean two different things. I have noticed this is often the cause of many hurt feelings. People feel they are arguing but in reality, they are saying the same thing in different ways. By stating at the onset what the word means in this context it reduces the chance of misunderstanding.

I may not always agree with Neils conclusions on some topics, but I appreciate the way he states his position and provides support for his conclusions. I also appreciate the way he formats his text. It makes reading it very easy for a brain like mine.


I feel Neils writing style is a good blend of his neurotype and the common tongue. Reading it, I get a strong sense of him and his passion. I can also understand his writing when the topic he expresses is utterly new to me.

I'd like to circle back to Neurodiversity. While I think it could be a beneficial growing experience for neurotypicals to appreciate and live with the spectrum, I'm not convinced it is as beneficial for us, simply because the effort is disproportionate. I'm skeptical the gap will ever close, and it physically takes its toll. And being an educator takes its toll as well.

And while I love that Jan appreciates straight talk, which is good because most autistics are incapable of anything but straight, I also think that a message unheard effectively says nothing. So if autistics want to be heard by neurotypicals then they either have to 1) train neurotypicals for autistic comprehension or 2) alter their message to be more accessible, or 3) rely on translators. That is, if one cares to. I'm not so sure I do. I'm finding myself snug as a bug in a rug and happiest when I am oblivious and not participating in those grueling exercises.

I live in the SF Bay Area, and every day conversation here is a PC minefield. This little satire piece could have been written about it:

Entire Human Race Problematic

This isn't the hyper-vigilant world I want to live in, but I do. And to me, all communities get ridiculous like that too often for my tastes. Sometimes communication is over-rated and just living/being aside/next to someone is enough. I can be neighbors with people and their criticisms and emotions, but that's as close as I want to get. So if polyculture is what you seek, that's as granular as I would want to go. I've always been attracted to homesteading for its self- containment, and permaculture helps make that possible with the smallest footprint. That's enough for me, especially after five decades of engagement with a society that takes more than it gives.

Last six post excellent especially Jan's. The only way I would not understand is if you removed your logical thinking. Is this not "diversity" perhaps only to a certain Aspie group but not wide spread enough? And what if I narrow the group and responses down further am I now the problem?

Heres a recent thread where advise was being given that could have potentially collapsed a ceiling who knows on an infant or child. OP starts as usually with a half backed idea to save a ton of money DIY. I chimed in with math that shuts down the responses since none has a rebuttal or in this case to life treating opinions not founded in fact..So tell me a better communication style? Fact is there is none other than for people to proove my math wrong or not to give advise on matters they do not understand which will never happen no matter what anyone does. Interesting part is after I posed this I had to correct my own math days later, the same basic math that should have been in the OP with a lot more info I had to request that is vital to responding was needed to even begin the discussions, nobody could even reply to as I wait and wait for someone to finish the rest of the basic required math.
https://permies.com/t/54793/natural-building/Straw-clay-attic-insulation

The OP did ask I "dumb it down" so it could be better understood so I did take the time out of my day to not ever receive a thank you since it is now obvious the OPs plan is not going to work at the reduced cost.

I'm beginning to understand Kitty's position what a complete waste of my time since the OP will probably continue with the half baked plan to save $$. Or, perhaps even after my attempts to "dumb down" yes at perhas the expense of clear accuracy (math) the OP still has no glue what I am taking about and for their own safety should seek pro help which was my last post. I'd advise to get pro help before to people that obviously have no glue only to be yelled at or told I am trying to sell myself which neither has been the case.

Terry Ruth wrote: I chimed in with math that shuts down the responses since none has a rebuttal or in this case to life treating opinions not founded in fact..So tell me a better communication style?

I suspect that for 99% of the population, math simply doesn't count as a communication style.They're gonna react the same way I do when I see computer code - ie it just looks like a mass of weird squiggles that are out to get me, so they remove their eyes from it as soon as possible and hope there's something written underneath that's actually comprehensible.

The OP did ask I "dumb it down" so it could be better understood so I did take the time out of my day to not ever receive a thank you since it is now obvious the OPs plan is not going to work at the reduced cost.

From experience, I'd say that no matter what you do to help people, you'll get fifty complaints for every expression of gratitude. And the thanks you do get will be from about three people only. The rest give the impression that they are entitled to it. You have to decide for yourself, are you working to do good, or to get thanks? And then be true to yourself no matter how little thanks or how many complaints you get.

I'm beginning to understand Kitty's position what a complete waste of my time since the OP will probably continue with the half baked plan to save $$.

It's likely that the OP will, yes. But there may be hundreds more reading your advice. Statistically speaking, they are the ones to worry about most.

Kitty Leith wrote:

Entire Human Race Problematic

This isn't the hyper-vigilant world I want to live in, but I do. And to me, all communities get ridiculous like that too often for my tastes. Sometimes communication is over-rated and just living/being aside/next to someone is enough. I can be neighbors with people and their criticisms and emotions, but that's as close as I want to get. So if polyculture is what you seek, that's as granular as I would want to go. I've always been attracted to homesteading for its self- containment, and permaculture helps make that possible with the smallest footprint. That's enough for me, especially after five decades of engagement with a society that takes more than it gives.

It's all too familiar.

Eco-village of two, Kitty...

Great post Neil. I agree that there is a strong difference between fact and opinion. It's not always easy to see (or express) the difference.

My opinion is that it's difficult to find fact in this day and age. Many scientific findings are governed by the interests financing the study or the values of the person(s) interpreting the data. Then these studies are interpreted by authors who 'translate' the science into popular media. There are a lot of biases that creep in at the various stages before it reaches us. And then we have conflicting studies. And then, even worse, we have a study with one set of variables used to apply broadly to all similar situations.

For example, if one were to look at the forests where I live, one would conclude that the mature forests are made up of almost exclusively conifers. Therefore, there are no deciduous mature forests.

By gathering data from other parts of the world, we can see that this conclusion is incorrect. But what if people were lazy? What if someone had a point to prove and wanted to promote conifer forests?

Evaluating the data and the conclusions from studies is a skill not many neurotypes have, and many of them, I suspect, do not come by it naturally. It takes training to evaluate data.

It's also very difficult for an established 'fact' to be challenged later, even if new data becomes available.

It's an established 'fact' that monoculture is more productive than companion planting* - if only by consensus of the science available. Yet, I know from personal experience, it is not a sound (both logically true and relevant to reality) conclusion.

This is why I'm frightened of calling things 'fact'. What is presented to us as 'fact' can often be the opinion of the people interpreting the data. What's worse, accepting something as 'fact' closes the door for new information.


The above is my opinion.

Then again, it is also my opinion that I don't want to wake up dead and buried under a collapsed roof. That's my bias and shows that I'm more ready to accept some things like building codes, as fact rather than evaluating the data for myself.


*This is tongue in cheek, not something I subscribe to. My grandfather, on the other hand, believed this wholeheartedly because that's what science taught him when he was a young man.

R Ranson wrote:Great post Neil. I agree that there is a strong difference between fact and opinion. It's not always easy to see (or express) the difference.

My opinion is that it's difficult to find fact in this day and age. Many scientific findings are governed by the interests financing the study or the values of the person(s) interpreting the data. Then these studies are interpreted by authors who 'translate' the science into popular media. There are a lot of biases that creep in at the various stages before it reaches us. And then we have conflicting studies. And then, even worse, we have a study with one set of variables used to apply broadly to all similar situations.

Indeed. There are some fields where I can rely on my understanding of the discipline. There are others where I might be able to spot flaws in experimental design. There are plenty where I'm just lost (which is one reason we needed soil scientists in the carbon thread mentioned above.

I rely strongly on consilience. For climate change this is very strong. For much of permaculture it remains a mess. One study is rarely in any way adequate.

Teaching people about consilience is tricky.

I also wanted to add that I think the permaculture aficionado is one of the most accepting of neurodiversity in society. I think it needs to go a long way in regards to other types of diversity, however.

The attitude of people who are attracted to permaculture works well with people who want to do things their own way or with people who HAVE TO do things their own way. I don't really see communication as an issue unless one is choosing to live intimately with a community. Even neurotypicals are challenged by that. Which makes me wonder if it isn't the definition of community which we should be talking about? How far does community have to reach into personal lives? What are its boundaries?

I, for one, am all about mutual aid. That's as much community as is necessary. We can help each other out without having to "get" each other fully. This way I am, it's just my way, and I don't need to communicate it any further than that.

Good stuff! I worked in a multimillion dollar test lab back in 2014 as a Project Engineer. Clients would hire us from all over the world to find out why their aircraft parts were failing in the field. We had to try and simulated world wide climates at altitudes and conditions they fly in the lab. When the data came in it was not always conclusive. Not easy trying to interpret data and we had a system called a "fault tree" we went through as a fact finding mission. One of the projects I was on was a seal on a landing gear was constantly developing microbials and failing it prematurely resulting in leaks. Very complex growing all the mold and fungi spores we thought we needed to look and the environmental conditions, along with test fixtures to simulate the landing gear mechanical loads in taxi and flight. When we got the test data a trained eye such as myself writing the final report and the rest of the team had to review it. It took years looking at data like this to be able to turn it into what could be viewed as subjective opinion or an educated guess into facts we could suggest to the client as a resolution, oh and in some cases millions of dollars later. At times we take the suggestion we thought was fact let the customer go run it in the field only to find out we were wrong, back to the lab, or the client had their own opinions of the data and took at different course of action.

My point is, as it is with building codes, as it is with aircraft specs, it takes a trained eye to interpret factual data sometimes. What I find out here often is the data (eg: code) is not even looked at, and an unfounded opinion is rendered, or, we get opinions like "code is founded in politics and gut reactions" with no specifics or facts to support that as an obvious opinion. Others are, "well it worked for me over in China so it has to work for you over in Hawaii" in a completely different climate zone, because my experience is my "fact" or truth and what you or code is suggesting as fact or the truth is a lie!

FYI: Reality: Many of the material properties used in building's, auto, aircraft, Powersports, etc, came from a similar lab a field testing process as I described above. There are also "safety factors" in those properties for errors and omissions. Unless you know what you are looking at or have been part of the process in developing those properties, it will be very difficult to challenge them with an opinion. In most cases, you find it is more accurate to trust that trained eye when it becomes a matter of opinion and know the difference. Many jurisdictions (not all) have that trained eye and can take International code and get rid of what does not fit. Imagine this, they even invite the public to voice an opinion that may or may not be adopted. These meetings are interesting since there are professionals with decades of experience dealing with code fact as proven, the public is no where as public as they are about faulty, politically driven code as they are on the internet. As a matter of fact, a lot of jurisdictions don't want to adopt some codes like energy in fear they bankrupt builders and new construction ceases. Sometimes it is always not about fact or best practices, or in the case of adopting energy codes until the federal government says so. The irony is politics is not always working against us as some believe. Much of the code does save lives, much more than opinions or experiences despite its issues.

The only objection I've found in this forum to the moderation in the way that it can conceal information about people we are interacting with. I spend enough time watching these forums to see many posts before they get moderated away, and to notice when people incrementally alter the precise phrasing of their statements until they reach the bare threshold of what will not be deleted.

I have a nearly pathological dislike of bullying and hypocrisy. Several different people working on a case by case basis to correct individual infractions as they occur makes it unreasonable to expect them to catch a pattern of such behavior. It would require them to have access to the aggregate of problems and both time enough reasonable suspicion to review them. Not being neurotypical is not, in my mind, a justifiable defense for behaving in an abusive fashion to others in your community. Seeing it happen in this community has left crying more than once because I can so clearly see how far this strays from the higher standards of this forum.

At no point have I felt that I was owed special consideration over someone who more easily fit society. It would have made my life much easier, and am sure there are people who went well above and beyond for my sake, but these were gifts, not anything owed me.

I'm far enough from neurotypical to have been repeatedly tested by professionals. In every test I've ever taken the results have placed me in the smallest group that the test is able to measure. These are both IQ and psychological evaluations. At no point has it ever been suggested that I have lost touch with reality. I've just always looked at it from a slightly different perspective.

Starting at twelve years until I was in my twenties I lived in suicidal depression because I was so convinced that my inability to match with my peers was a moral failing on my part. It was only an extreme stubborn streak and too much pride to let me quit trying that pushed the actual suicide attempt into my adult years. And it was an honest attempt which I will carry the visible scars of until the day I die.

I haven't finished the thread,but what I have read so far matches what I know from life,that being that the neuro atypical can be amongst the least tolerant of difference.
For some, this is what makes their atypical thinking visible.
My son is Aspie. He is can be tolerant to a fault( still wanting to befriend the child that wanted to stab him),or he can insist that everyone around him do things his way, or he will not be able to live.
No matter how many times he does not get his way and yet survives, he still won't or cannot listen to reason the next time.
He has a model of the world in his head, that which do not match that module need not apply for entry.
A lot of people think this way. His difficulty is that it seems to be involuntary.

He is who he is. My Milage with other Aspies has varied,as one would expect.


To all Neuro types I say this: The world at large does not believe it owes you understanding.
That you may feel the same way towards the world,is of little consequence to the world.
If you do encounter understanding, it is in your interest to encourage it.

R Ranson wrote:Is it possible, in the hectic period yesterday, there was a confusion between neurotypes and training? Mode of thinking and skillset?

If a mechanic works on a car, are we bothered about what his/her neurotype is, or do we care more that he can repair the breaks?

Good question. Did the mechanic cut a hole in the hood of the car, or did he open the hood? Is ther grease all over the interior?
Does it run better but pollute more? Better gas mileage but no back seat? Or is it perfect, rebuilt to better than factory standard, but at a cost that would have bought another car?
The expectations are different. As a handy man, I avoid solutions that I think are stupid. Usually this means they are too expensive, or too concerned with esthetics.
My customers often have other priorities. They may be willing to pay for looks over function,or at least they think they are willing to.
I might flat out regect a job where I suspect I cannot even perceive the level of finish that is desired, much less deliver it.
I think these differences stem from something very basic. Neuro type is as good a word as any.

I suspect there is no such thing as neuro typical, just unique minds conforming to a perceived norm. Finding commen ground occurs through the rudimentary telepathy that is language.

My washing machine is held together with 1/4" bolts. I was able to understand the innards but the clips holding the front panel on baffled me.
I brute forced it apart, fixed the innards, and rebuilt it in a way that served my needs best.
Most of my clients would not be ok with the results, no matter how useful or expedient.
Most of my clients don't know what 4 inches looks like, what a bolt is, or how fix a damned thing.
But without catering to their ( to me ) alien minds, I will not get their business.
Who is neuro typical in this situation? It doesn't matter. We must come to an understanding or I might go hungry and they might have to do without comforts of needs.

William Bronson wrote:
To all Neuro types I say this: The world at large does not believe it owes you understanding.

I think there may be some benefit in demanding that which the world does not believe it owes us.. Many of us would be much worse off if folks in the past had said "the world doesn't owe me anything, therefore I will not demand anything, but settle for crumbs."

Jan White wrote:... Apart from the information, I was specifically enjoying how, I thought, people were able to say "I disagree with you" or "No, you're wrong on that" without anyone getting hurt feelings. I'm going to pick on Neil Layton here because he started the discussion and because I very much admire his writing style and have been paying attention to it. I've noticed that he can write with a certain tone that the average person often associates with aggression or rudeness. Most of the discussion on this thread has been about vocabulary - lay vs. technical, for example - and that can be part of the tone I'm talking about, but it's more than that. It's a bluntness, a lack of coddling - or maybe personal validation would be a better term, as that's been mentioned already. The thing about this tone is that as soon as people encounter it, they decide to take offense. ...

Hi Jan. Is that so? I did not notice any 'aggression' or 'rudeness' in Neil's way of writing. I like his posts, because they are clear. I like the way he does not offend anyone personally.
Could it be I did not see that 'bluntness' because I am Dutch, or could that tell I have Asperger syndrome?

Please can anyone explain to me what is a 'normal person'? I don't think I know anyone who is like 'the average person' ...

Casie Becker wrote:The only objection I've found in this forum to the moderation in the way that it can conceal information about people we are interacting with. I spend enough time watching these forums to see many posts before they get moderated away, and to notice when people incrementally alter the precise phrasing of their statements until they reach the bare threshold of what will not be deleted.

I have a nearly pathological dislike of bullying and hypocrisy. Several different people working on a case by case basis to correct individual infractions as they occur makes it unreasonable to expect them to catch a pattern of such behavior. It would require them to have access to the aggregate of problems and both time enough reasonable suspicion to review them. Not being neurotypical is not, in my mind, a justifiable defense for behaving in an abusive fashion to others in your community. Seeing it happen in this community has left crying more than once because I can so clearly see how far this strays from the higher standards of this forum.

At no point have I felt that I was owed special consideration over someone who more easily fit society. It would have made my life much easier, and am sure there are people who went well above and beyond for my sake, but these were gifts, not anything owed me.

I'm far enough from neurotypical to have been repeatedly tested by professionals. In every test I've ever taken the results have placed me in the smallest group that the test is able to measure. These are both IQ and psychological evaluations. At no point has it ever been suggested that I have lost touch with reality. I've just always looked at it from a slightly different perspective.

Starting at twelve years until I was in my twenties I lived in suicidal depression because I was so convinced that my inability to match with my peers was a moral failing on my part. It was only an extreme stubborn streak and too much pride to let me quit trying that pushed the actual suicide attempt into my adult years. And it was an honest attempt which I will carry the visible scars of until the day I die.

Thank you for sharing your experiences.
I had not read your post when I posted immediately below you, so any echoes are a coincidence.
I have only in the past few years gotten adequate treatment for my own depression and anxiety .
I am 45, and until recently considered my continued existence the result of cowardice.
I feel better now!

When I met my son, my love and empathy sprung from recognizing myself in him.
That is what made me emphasize to him that he is able.
To assume that someone challenged is someone unable is to give up on that person.
Again and again I have been aided by people that told me much latter that they were not sure I would make it.
They bet on a long shot, not a sure thing.
I failed at almost everything before getting kinda good at some things.
This is what I know he will make it, depspite our best efforts.
I subscribe to the Wilma Rudolph model of "disability". From premature birth and polio induced paralysis to Olympic gold.
Can we all do as well? No telling if we don't try.
My boy will be getting a job after he gets his associates degree in chemical technology this spring.
When I met him, he communicated his frustrations via biting. He was six.
He had peers who still communicate in this way.
No telling what would have happened if someone had demand more of them.

Tyler Ludens wrote:

William Bronson wrote:
To all Neuro types I say this: The world at large does not believe it owes you understanding.

I think there may be some benefit in demanding that which the world does not believe it owes us.. Many of us would be much worse off if folks in the past had said "the world doesn't owe me anything, therefore I will not demand anything, but settle for crumbs."

Exactly why I worded it the way I did.

I think there is much more neurodiversity than is commonly recognized. Some people can't do math to save their lives. Some can't write worth a hoot. Some think with their hands and can fix anything. Some are social networking geniuses. The trick is to realize the value in each and let them have a spot where they can contribute. When I was a kid in germany, every train crossing had a little phone booth sized building next to it. Inside the building was an old person who couldn't do a lot of heavy work, but they could raise and lower the bar stopping the cars. I'm not advocating forcing old people to do menial work, but I am saying that people have a need to feel like thay are contributing, and their actions actually need to contribute, if only for their own sense of self worth. The problem in the overall society is that some abilities are rewarded lavishly and valued while others, sometimes more valuable abilities, are disparaged.

There needs to be a place at the table for everyone, but in the jostling to find your spot, you will certainly get an elbow in the ribs occasionally. We're all learning.

I think there may be some benefit in demanding that which the world does not believe it owes us.. Many of us would be much worse off if folks in the past had said "the world doesn't owe me anything, therefore I will not demand anything, but settle for crumbs."

Well said!!