With other neurodivergents, I feel like we explain what we mean in more detail. If not that, the other one recognizes the lacking detail, asks about it, and it gets cleared up.

When I talk to neurotypicals, or read or hear them discuss among themselves, this doesn’t happen as much. When I ask, it’s often seen as rude.

Here’s some examples of what I mean:

There’s a lot of ackshually, x is a fruit/berry/not a berry/ etc. When in fact, the terms each have two definitions: a culinary one and a botanical one. A strawberry is a berry in the culinary sense, but not the botanical one. A tomato is a fruit in the botanical sense, but not the culinary one. Ive repeatedly been called a know-it-all for bringing this up, and ironically usually by the person correcting others by saying, eg., a tomato is a fruit.

‘Do(n’t) you trust me?’ I may 100% trust your intentions, but I don’t 100% trust your judgment. This has nothing to do with you; I never 100% trust anyone’s judgment, including my own. This happens the other way around, too, when I ask someone for feedback about a decision I’m making, and they say they trust me and thus won’t give input. Like, thank you for trusting my intentions, but I don’t want you to blindly trust my judgment. That’s why I’m asking for feedback.

Another one is respect. Sometimes, to respect someone means to accept them as an authority figure, and sometimes it means to treat them with basic human dignity. It’s hardly ever specified which it is.

I could go on here, so please feel free to add your own, I’m curious!

Do you also find this to be an issue with as well as among neurotypicals or am I way off here? Thanks for you replies!

  • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
    4·
    4 days ago

    Verbal communication is horribly inefficient. This is why smaller teams can very often accomplish more than larger teams. The communication overhead, including miscommunications, grows more than linearly. Us detail oriented people give more detail than the average person can obsorb (nor wants to). This causes an increase in the “yes” response just to end the discussion.
    On the flip side, non-detail oriented people on average have a really hard time seeing all the potential interpretations of thier words. To them, thier interpretation is the only one that exists. So any question either means the questioners is dumb, or doesn’t trust them.

    I believe the solution for the later is generally to communicate some pleasantly about what they said that reassures them that you trust them or something. But I have yet to be able to build that habit. For the former… write docs (if we are talkjng work). Then speak concisly and reference the existence of the docs. They probably won’t read them, but it can fill our need to communicate the details and allow us to be more comfortable leaving out details in the conversation. At least to me, the details are a compulsion.