This article picks apart a bunch of biases by the researchers of a given paper. The object of study was the differences in behavior between a group of autistic people and a group of non-autistic people when choosing between prioritizing value for oneself or value for the community.
I recommend reading the paper itself too. If that is, understandably, too much for you, I suggest you go for the introduction, the conclusion, and the segments mentioned in the article.
This is very interesting. I’m not diagnosed but strongly suspect I’m on the spectrum and the article rings true for me.
I generally avoid confrontation but I will gladly ruin a whole conversation if I feel like someone else believes something I find immoral or unethical
I feel the same and am on the spectrum myself. I feel that if I don’t say anything when something immoral is said, by not acknowledging it as immoral I’m tacitly supporting it. After all, if it bothered me, why didn’t I say anything?
Of course, there’s some nuance to when and how to have an argument. But I feel there’s a much larger desire to keep the peace among my other family members. Even though some of those family members are really shitty people.
There are twelve people having dinner at the table. One of them is a nazi, and openly argues for the extermination of the one minority he hates. No one pushes back against him. There are now twelve nazis having dinner at the table.
