Yeah, I suspect the fact that Autism reduces a person's ability to relate emotionally and socially to themselves and others allows them to dedicate more brain power to thinking rationally. In a mild enough case, with a supportive tribe, they could be a useful advisor. No autistic members = tribe has trouble making good collective decisions. Too many autistic members = tribe can't collaborate. That's just my armchair psychologist theory though.
That's a bad stereotype. It's far more common for autistic people to have the ability to relate emotionally to others cranked up to overwhelming levels (hyper-empathy), which makes them avoid situations that require relating to others out of severe stress it's usually causing on them - leading to other people perceiving them as unempathetic.
I almost wonder if empathy is the right word then, maybe this would best be described as something like "susceptibility to emotional contagion." Empathy as commonly defined includes an impulse to comfort and stand by, as opposed to avoidance.
Empathy has a performative component to neurotypicals. If you are not acting as though you are empathizing, you have "no empathy" and are thus a strange form of psychopath. Actual psychopaths can pass the performative part of neurotypical empathy with flying colors because they are excellent maskers and mirrorers -- that is, of course, when they can be bothered to try at all.
Neurotypical psychology is deep, complex, and fascinating. They devote significant brainpower to constantly evaluating and testing other people's behavior against a constantly evolving set of rules in order to ascertain whether they are a member of the neurotypical's tribe or ingroup. The rules have to change and evolve because ingroup members will be able to predict how they will change, and so catch any outgroupers who have heretofore successfully infiltrated the ingroup. It's like you have a monster CPU with a lot of cores, and then devote half (or more!) of those cores to the world's most elaborate DRM scheme. We benefit because much of that CPU power is in us freed to do other exciting things, like programming or particle physics; but we also suffer because most of the people around us cannot attest that we are legitimate humans running a legitimate copy of the human OS.
Relatedly, I love Japan and I love the Japanese people but... Japanese society has one of the most elaborate, impenetrable set of social rules in the world. If you want to know why hikikomori are such a thing there, it's simple, really: so many more people are frustrated with their failure to conform to the elaborate ruleset it takes to simply be Japanese and tired of being flagged as impostors in that game of Among Us that they simply give up and withdraw into whatever brings them comfort.
I would have thought the main performance bottle neck to social calibration would be the unspoken mind-reading requirement that seems to be prevalent in American society.
Perhaps I'm wrong, but from what I know of Japanese society is that it's pretty blunt in its expectations. So there isn't this "mental searching tax" to make the "right" social choice that seems to be de riguer in the States. Everyday behavior in Japanese society has explicit procedures that don't change all that much.
As I understand it, social failure in Japan is result of one of two things:
The inability/lack of interest to follow these procedures (e.g. hikikomori, non-conformists, etc.), or following these procedures but with mistaken assumptions as to how the consequences would turn out (e.g. "herbivore" salarymen who have done everything right, but are unable to find wives like their fathers could)
That's interesting. A German friend of mine who's on the spectrum and had established a second life in Japan told me that Japan's explicitly defined social mores, and slightly more chilly and formal relations between people suit him much better than the Western default. His German buddies who also have one foot in Japan all seem like they're on the spectrum too, because of this I thought Japanese culture is a safe harbor for autistic folks.
I've commonly said that the Japanese are Germans to strangers and Italians to family and close friends. Sometimes as a quip I add that they're Irish in the bar, lol.
Japanese society is not really safe harbor for Japanese on the spectrum. It is, however, quite gracious to foreigners. As a foreigner no one will say anything to you, for instance, if you use the wrong honorific or something; most will be impressed that you can speak the language at all.
Once you've been living and working in Japan for some time and have started to assimilate, though, you are on and you've got to perform the appropriate rituals or people will start to think you're being aggressively rude.
I've generally had the impression that German society is itself quite procedural and legalistic. So much so, that I'm wondering how much of a difference between the two societies your friend and his friends perceive. Was that his only reason to go to Japan or were there others?
Well, for one thing, we Americans claim to value honest communication to each other in our personal relationships. Whether we actually live up to those values is a different matter, but my point here is the Japanese do NOT. Honne/tatemae is pretty ingrained into Japanese society, and you must avoid embarrassing yourself and, more importantly, your ingroup (family, company, club, etc.) by being too honest around outgroupers. The Japanese are so pressured to not lose face that they are actively encouraged to hide their feelings and intentions, even when showing them would be mutually beneficial. You see it in business -- the old saw about circumlocutions like "We will give your proposal the consideration it deserves" meaning "no freaking way"[0] -- but you also see it in modern Japanese drama. Taro loves Hanako and Hanako loves Taro, but they are from different social strata and their parents would be shocked to find out they're in love, so neither of them says anything and neither of them knows the feelings of the other. Plus Taro is going to America to play baseball and Hanako is going to medical school. Will one of them work up the courage to go against the social grain and the wishes of their family, and confess their feelings before it's too late? Or will they just say shouganai and go about their lives without ever knowing what could have been? That sort of thing.
So as a Japanese person you are tasked with not only following the rituals, but also sussing out from the vaguest of cues what your friends, family, potential mate, etc. are thinking because they're following the rituals too instead of engaging in explicit communication.
Regrettably, I had to learn a lot of this by reading; I don't have a lot of personal experience with this because I'm a Westerner. The Japanese are generally more willing to be open with foreigners because of the relative lack of social repercussions for honesty with foreigners than with Japanese. They don't have to be "on", they don't have to actively be Japanese in front of us and that makes for some interesting and refreshing barside conversation, lol.
[0] Earlier negative stereotypes of Japanese as being "sneaky" and untrustworthy are partially rooted in this sort of thing. They mask their true intentions to avoid embarrassment, but to Americans it looks like they're trying to trick or defraud us. And they see us as loud, pushy bulls in china shops who are unable to handle delicate affairs with any nuance, even if we're well-meaning.
> Empathy as commonly defined includes an impulse to comfort and stand by, as opposed to avoidance.
Right, and thinking something is delicious includes an impulse to eat rather than avoid, but lots of people still avoid food they think is delicious in order to diet. When empathy becomes too strong then it starts hurting you as a person a lot every time you see someone who has problems, so you learn to predict and avoid those situations, or you might even learn to fear them since the empathy creates too much agony in you. Empathy is just a feeling, your rational part can still work around it.
Empathy is seeing the world from someone else's perspective. While it's common to comfort and stand by someone you empathize with, particularly if they are going through tough times as you presumably recognize that they want to be comforted and stood by, that impulse isn't itself empathy.
Exactly - the overwhelming nature of these signals (e.g. the searing brightness of eye contact) pushes people away from them. This then produces difficulties as a result of not seeing these signals (and not learning about them). The result is a lack of Cognitive Empathy - inability to read signals - which is often confused with a lack of Affective Empathy as seen in sociopaths.
Or maybe it is still a fact, but the definition of autism/Asperger changed so it is no longer true with the new definition?
There seems to be a great bundling going on, where people with a wide range of various problems gets bundled under large umbrella terms like "ADHD" or "Autism". Before Autism and Asperger was different, now they are the same etc. and some even argue that ADHD and Autism are the same thing.
Edit: Btw, there was one stereotype that was never true, that Autists didn't have empathy. Autists always felt empathy. What they were said to lack was the ability to read people, not feel empathy for people. Not being able to read people can be said to reduce "a person's ability to relate emotionally and socially to themselves and others", so that statement wasn't wrong with the old definition/understanding.
Autistic people can have trouble accessing emotions, but a lot of the reason for that stereotype is just that they communicate their emotions and emotional reactions differently and/or that their emotional reactions to certain situations are different to those of neurotypical people: not that they're not actually feeling emotions at all.
Later in life I considered myself to be on the autistic spectrum as it explained many of my quirks. Growing up, I thought everyone was normal like me but less rational. Very recently I found out about Alexithymia, the inability to identify, describe or express one's own emotions, which actually nails it. Many of the outward interactions are similar but the internal experience is different. The best way I can describe my experiences is that the 'feeling' or even awareness of existence of an emotion lags, sometimes by hours, until it becomes sorted-out and conscious. I also don't much have emotional overloads other than being drained by certain forms of interactions that I'd chalked up to being introverted, which was odd because I'm very extroverted at times. I don't know if it's a good or bad thing that I don't put effort into interacting emotionally outside my closest circles.
Maybe it's like smell, where there are many bad scents and even if it didn't impact my survival I wouldn't want to live without the sense, and I should indulge more. The only concrete thing I've learned is that significantly reducing my caffeine intake helps but also distracts.
It’s less about being unable to access our emotions than our emotions being frequently influenced by sensory (over)stimulation — we learn to ignore them because they often tell us things that aren’t useful.
My main trigger is light — too bright, bad color, too much flicker, all of which can cause me to get “irrationally” angry in a conversation about any mundane topic. I’m not really that passionate about most of the things I get overwhelmed by, so my heightened emotional state because of some sensory stimulus is not useful.
All my anger/sadness tells me is that it’s bright and I need to either put on some sunglasses or turn off the lights. I have learned over time not to blow up at other people about it because it’s not their fault, and they’ll think that I think it is if I have a meltdown in front of them.
I doubt autism correlates that strongly with resilience and grit. But I have long thought that groups benefit from having a portion of the population having autism. Variance in thinking means more potential strategies for success. Too much variance probably hurts group cohesion.
IMHO the most effective adaptation for "solo or small tribe survival" that we and other primates have is all the factors that decrease one's chances of being put in the very disadvantageous solo or tiny tribe situation. (For example, various submissive behaviors and the quite interesting concept of crying seem to be adaptations towards that - continuing to live in a larger tribe instead of leaving) It's simpler and more effective to try and avoid or fix that problem in the first place, instead of trying to optimize for tolerating the problem.
