I have issues with the "top-down ( purported to be most NTs)" and "bottom-up (purported to be most autistics)" thinking binary.
I don't think these labels identify the differences as I believe this is an issue of motivation and value judgement.
Let's take the common example of essay writing for school. The story goes "when they asked us to write an outline, the NT students got right on it while the ND kids were bewildered because how could they write a bullet point version of an essay that didn't exist yet."
This makes intuitive sense to everyone who experienced the frustration of being asked to write that outline so we connect over this and give this as an example of our "thinking style" difference from the NT population.
If we actually think about this a little, though, the example, while a common experience, doesn't actually demonstrate how our thinking differs.
First, NTs and NDs both need to acknowledge the concept of an essay. If we then say "the NTs get right on writing the outline when asked to do so, which means their brain started from the concept of an essay, then automagically filled it out with a list of section titles, then guided their person through the acts necessary to fill out those sections," does this sufficiently explain what is happening? After all, the ND people can write research essays, and without coming up with an outline first too!
I think there's something deeper going on here. I think, the main difference is priorities, not the method of thinking.
In my opinion, when asked to write an essay, most NT people respond by asking "why" or even "what's in it for me" first, and since the school structure pre-answers that question for them, move onto "how," which is also formalized for their convenience: "start by thinking of possible questions and reword them as titles, put them in a list. This way, you won't have to experience the inconvenience of being curious for once." The entire process is optimized for form over substance.
In the same situation, putting the curiosity first, most ND people respond by "<insert every question possible>", and concluding "I'm going to start looking into it." No instruction necessary because the ND brain here optimized the question asking part of the endeavor. The information will be gathered and new questions will form and then more information will be gathered until there's too much of it and..." Yeah... "why are we doing this again?" Notice the "how" isn't very important here, even though it's included in the "every question possible" because after all, what can be more natural than making observations and learning other people's observations and then putting them into a report of facts? Substance rules, and form will emerge as a necessity.
So, I like thinking about "substantial (substance first)" and "formal (form first)" modes of thinking rather than "bottom-up" vs "top-down".
If you're still reading, thanks!
I'm curious as to what everyone else thinks about this issue :)
@CynAq@actuallyautistic I also dislike the top-down vs bottom-up canard, and it smells a little like NTs trying to figure out how we think without asking us to comment. Maybe it's that autistic folk see more connections between all the different concepts, so forcing that multi-dimensional, interconnected map into a hierarchical outline or a linear narrative is not always straightforward. There are usually several ways to organize all those connected ideas, so how do you know which one is best? How do you know the best way to say something until you know what you want to say?
The essay writing example is probably a terrible example, though. Allistics love to say things where what they say doesn't mean anything at all, but the way they say it means everything. The assignment to write an essay is at least as much about learning the form and showing you can use it as it is about writing an essay that says something, or even what it says. One of the hardest exam questions I ever got in college was an essay question, and I had no idea what to say, so I just rephrased the question and said "I don't know" a lot, but I used the right form of answer, so I got full credit.
> Allistics love to say things where what they say doesn't mean anything at all, but the way they say it means everything.
I think this is a big point. Rather than communicating concepts, most talking is about affirming the intensity and positivity of group affiliation.
The goal is not to get a question answered, the goal is to get the correct amount of answer back, with the correct emotional tone, to validate that the questioner's assumption about pack status is correct.
@CynAq@actuallyautistic
I actually didn't think that anyone does or can do it in the way you describe it for NT people. School is a bit long ago, but I am supervising people who write scientific papers and PhD thesis. Everyone gathers questions and facts and writes tons of text. Structuring, selecting, etc. is difficult for almost every single person I know.
I'm writing AGAINST the dichotomy of "top down/ bottom up" thinking, not in favor of it.
However, even in a PhD setting, the required path puts too much emphasis on the "form first" method of doing it, evident in the way we strive to formalize everything into predetermined structures.
The fact that there are shared difficulties among ADHD and Autistic researchers which do NOT affect their NT counterparts the same way is undeniable.
In other words, writing good research papers are difficult for everyone, but not in the same ways. The differences between how most NT people and most ND people experience these difficulties are demonstrable.
In every PhD program I'm familiar with, candidates are required to submit study plans and summaries BEFORE they actually do the preliminary research needed.
The complexity of the situation doesn't allow for this to happen, naturally, resulting in the inevitable flexing of the written rules of conduct.
This "say one thing and do another" is a very real source of stress for most ND candidates I know, including myself, before I dropped out of my PhD program due to burnout.
I'm really interested in the point "for ND people this is much more difficult than for NT" - do you have a study or so explaining this? Because I really know lots of people who dropped out of their PhD or still try to write their first paper for years, because of exactly this problem.
I didn't say "this is much more difficult for ND people." I said, "the difficulties experienced by NT and ND people are different." Given that these people are subject to the same formal environment and the same rules, the level of difficulty and the potential accommodations they receive will also be different.
Also, there are tons of ND people who don't realize they are ND among grad students. I was one when I dropped out. I had absolutely no idea I had a literally different brain structure than that of the average person so, that also has to be taken into account.
@CynAq@actuallyautistic
Sorry for the over-paraphrasing, though I'd still be interested in a study or so about the differences, especially how supervisors could level out difficulties (preferably for all people).
I am aware that many people who are ND are not aware of that fact. Though if >>50% have big difficulties, wouldn't it be good to improve the process, period?
Of course! I'm glad you're asking these questions.
The issue is, these fields are very new and the ND communities are slowly beginning to establish their language about these problems. We're at the very beginning of a period where, hopefully, we will find effective ways to convey the issues, do the research, and come to useful conclusions as to how they can be mitigated for everyone, NT and ND alike.
Originally, I'm a material science researcher. While there are many anecdotal sources of information such as blog posts and this thread we're conversing in, formal studies done on these issues are sadly very NT oriented still. This 'form over substance' seem to be a major problem plaguing the research. The form you'll see is an emphasis on the observable behaviors of ND people without regard to their internal experience.
I'll make a note and give you a follow though, so whenever I find something I think will be useful for you, I'll give you a heads-up.
@CynAq@onezero@actuallyautistic
🤨 academia seems like labyrinth of seeming counter intuitive mechanics and of course there’s the economics and politics.
I’m pretty sure that’s why there’s a big disconnect between me having a degree or not having a degree.
Yet I love nature and science. I feel so conflicted most of the time. I like institutions like SFI that are more intra disciplinary.
I’m just trying to figure it out really. I have no problem with learning. My IO is a little skewed😀
I think you did a great job explaining it, and a school essay is the perfect example.
I pride myself on having made it halfway through college without having ever written a 5-graf essay. My mind doesn't think like that. I'll do two grafs on one idea, then three on a totally different one, reference a third well-known idea and conclude with two grafs tying all three ideas into my main thesis. This time. Next time, I'll have a different thesis.