Here is a good instance of autistic folks' potential contribution to the field. The quote speaks of the desirability, for analytical purposes, of situations where the "definition of reality" is shaky. Well, autistic folks’ definition of reality is nearly always precarious, the processes always at the surface. There's always the chance that some crucial nuance will be missed, or that some best-guess approximation of appropriateness will result in a huge blunder.

Instability in a race vehicle makes for greatest maneuverability, but the vehicle is harder to control - and consequences of error more drastic - for a less-skilled driver. So it’s like there’s oil on the track, plus fog, plus hostile acts by other drivers, plus caution/advisory flags in some foreign language or protocol...

The process is potentially more accessible in autistic folks, I’d say, because the social/emotional “side effects” of the precariousness can lead things off in another direction entirely, plunging situations back into familiar ruts rather than risk the more-disturbing possibility of losing continuity altogether. But what is so scary about not knowing what to say? Some of us live there all the time. The very nature of consciousness may be different, with neurotypical folks content to be swimming in the varying depths of familiarity instead of hanging out at the boundary layer like us . (And isn’t it a tenet of physical science that all the interesting stuff takes place at boundaries?)

Last revised: June 19, 2007
(c)2007 Dave Spicer
(back to project main page)