Your daily spergout, taken more or less directly from the Discord. Part 1 is here.
The reason autistes and neurotypicals get along like oil and water is that neurotypicals engage in controlled social conflict frequently, whereas autistic people engage in binary all-or-nothing conflict infrequently. With autistic people, you’re either “in” or “out”. We are literally incapable of understanding what a “frenemy” is. So either you get full access, or you’re a danger. Contrast this with the neurotypical distinction between the personal and social spheres, where people in the social (public) sphere get carefully limited access. The autistic tendency to get attached to mapping the territory and the neurotypical tendency to prefer existing in unmapped territory, as explained in part 1, actually derive directly from this difference.
I explained it to my sister one time in these terms: imagine that I can only see things when I know what they’re called, but you only see things when you don’t know what they’re called. It would be very difficult for us to communicate because I’d always want to name things so we can talk about them, but you’d want me not to name them so we can talk about them. And not just frustrating, but easily mistaken for hostility on both sides. I’d interpret your unwillingness to engage in cultural transmission as an attempt to keep me enslaved in ignorance, unable to navigate a world where all the objects are invisible. And vice versa.
If we introduce the two different social conflict models, these mindsets make sense. For a neurotypical, who engages in controlled social conflict, the act of describing something puts that knowledge into the tribal knowledge. People then react to that knowledge, repositioning themselves. For example, saying “John is going out with Mary” fundamentally shifts the social landscape. By observing this out loud, the object is changed. Hence, important information carries a price tag. This is similar to my analogy above where the object “disappears”, which is a crude way of saying “ceases to exist precisely as it was”. When neurotypicals gossip, they do so in hushed tones with people they like or want to like them.
A more succinct expression of this is “with neurotypicals, the act of drawing the map changes the territory”.
With aspergoids and so on, formalizing things sets them in stone because if someone in the tribe disagrees, their options are to accept it, escalate to combat, or leave the tribe. That’s why we tend to the naive view that “information wants to be free”. In a tribe where cooperation is assumed, it’s better for everyone to know everything to avoid confusion. I.e. If Mike wants to go out with Mary and he hears about John, the assumption is that he will not try to sabotage them covertly or commit adultery given the opportunity. If he does, such a betrayal of the group interest (relatively minor in neurotypical society) is grounds for banishment. So if a high-trust group breeds out the tendency to engage in controlled conflict, they will tend to become very attached to cultural transmission. I.e. Communicated articulate systems, ideas, etc. The more succinct expression of this one would be “with autistes, the map freezes the territory in place”.
It’s worth mentioning that this is actually a spectrum from less comfortable with controlled conflict to more comfortable, not a binary distinction. But it’s necessary to describe in binary terms first in order to communicate the conceptual connection.