Math Talent, Asperger's Syndrome,"Social Skills"

[David Sklansky]

2% of social people rule the world. The other 98% would be tossed into a trash heap far worse than a toy box by those 2%. And when the top talented geeks decide to become even marginal at social skills they can usurp the vast majority of even that top 2%.

[NickMPK]

[ QUOTE ]
All these lengthy replies make good points but none refute my original one. Expert analytical thinkers are struck by the silliness of many arbitrary social rituals in a way that others aren't. (Not the general need for them. The rituals themselves.) And they therefore tend to feel more uncomfortable doing them than the average joe who doesn't think about that stuff. But I never disputed that those thinkers shouldn't make an effort to overcome that discomfort to get what they want.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course people tend to discount the merit of things that they don't find inherently interesting. This is like saying that extremely outgoing and charismatic people are "struck by the silliness" of learning multiplication tables. Knowing the things the people who are good as socializing know (how to interpret and react to people's nonverbal emotional cues) is actually much more important to the success of most people than knowing the things that math geniuses are good at.

[David Sklansky]

You are confused. Some social skills, like picking up on nonverbal cues, are obviously important. I'm talking about arbitrary rituals that vary from culture to culture. They are a lot less intrinsically important than multiplication skills.

[drunkencowboy]

Dont you love how psychologists came up with the term "Aspergers Syndrome" for people who dont partake in all the trivial social rituals. It is also refered to as "Aspergers Disorder"... So basically the psychologists want to say that there is something wrong with being anything other than a retarded ant like they are.

[drunkencowboy]

Maybe they will come up with some new pill (using a different amount of SPEED) to fix people with Aspergers like they did with ADD. goddamn bastards.

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
2% of social people rule the world. The other 98% would be tossed into a trash heap far worse than a toy box by those 2%. And when the top talented geeks decide to become even marginal at social skills they can usurp the vast majority of even that top 2%.

[/ QUOTE ]
In what ways do these 2% rule the world? What skills or wisdom do they possess that allow them do this? What evidence do you have that people with math skills could outdo those skills or wisdoms?

[drunkencowboy]

money rules the world. these people have money.

[dragon14]

[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand it is important to understand that the majority of math geniuses can learn these silly rituals if they find it imperative to do so. And get better at them than most who don't know math. Just
like almost everything else.


[/ QUOTE ]

Individuals with Asperger's have social deficits as a matter of course. That's a major part of having Asperger's. The idea that they could get better at social skills than most people strikes me as extremely unlikely.

A scientist or mathematician who acts strangely and doesn't follow social conventions has difficulty with social situations by nature and also has less opportunity to practice socialization and get better at it.

If they have an innate belief that others behavior is ridiculous or foolish, how are they going to improve socially? They would feel as if they are not being true to themselves.

I agree that they can improve socially, but it takes a lot of work and is fairly stressful. If socialization were easy for them, they would already be doing it. Math types can improve socially, but their different way of viewing the world and others is nearly always going to leave them lacking socially compared to people without Asperger's.

[drunkencowboy]

I think what David means is that a highly intelligent person trying hard can mimic the rituals of the crowd in such a way that they look better doing it than the others. The smarter person can act "even cooler" than the next guy if he was to put his mind to it...

Am i right, David, or am i right. lol

[NickMPK]

[ QUOTE ]
I think what David means is that a highly intelligent person trying hard can mimic the rituals of the crowd in such a way that they look better doing it than the others. The smarter person can act "even cooler" than the next guy if he was to put his mind to it...

Am i right, David, or am i right. lol

[/ QUOTE ]

Except that in the case of people with Asperger's tendencies, this isn't true. There is more to social cues than mimicry, and people with Asperberger's, while they can be trained to follow certain cues, ultimately cannot do so effectively because they won't understand the underlying reasons why they are doing what they do, because they don't understand the emotions of other people.

For example, wearing your cuffs a certain way might be "cool", but it is undoubtedly "cool" for reasons that are not arbitrary. You can teach a Asperger's patient to wear his cuffs a certain way, but he won't be able to translate this the next time the fashion changes, because it is not as simple as just mimicking a certain person.

For example, you could give a math-challenged student an integral to solve and tell him exactly what model to solve it with, and he could probably do it. But that doesn't mean he will recognize what model he is supposed to use the next time he is asked to integrate.