I have strongly suspected high masking autism with CPTSD. Two Ehlers Danlos Syndrome Specialists say I have autism, but there is no way to test it in a 38 year old woman. They deal with autistic people a lot as they say, "You are more likely than not to have autism with a hyper-mobility disorder than not." Recently I was diagnosed for the second time with pretty severe ADHD.

I think the autism shows in these tests... could you please help me know where it shows?

I took the first test considering my emotional volatility in reactions to noise, other very sensitive sensorium and CPTSD. I hate experiencing any emotion other than geeking out, laughing or hyper-focusing. I have virtually no short term memory so I didn't remember any of the questions, save 1 or 2.

I took the second test based upon how I am when I am not overstimulated or burnt out and based it solely on my logical thoughts about me and things.

The third test, I asked my room mate, who I have lived with for 17 + years, the questions about me. I did not influence any of his answers.

First test Emotional Realm considered:

Openness to experience: 48

Conscientiousness: 0

Extroversion: 0

Agreeableness: 18

Neuroticism: 100

Under Openness to Experience

Intellect: 28

Openness: 72

Under Conscientiousness

Industriousness: 0

Orderliness: 24

Under Extroversion

Enthusiasm: 0

Assertiveness: 0

Under Agreeableness

Compassion: 2

Politeness: 71

Under Neuroticism

Volatility: 100

Withdrawal: 100

Second Test Logical Realm:

Openness to experience: 79

Conscientiousness: 1

Extroversion: 0

Agreeableness: 0

Neuroticism: 100

Under Openness to Experience

Intellect: 50

Openness: 92

Under Conscientiousness

Industriousness: 0

Orderliness: 67

Under Extroversion

Enthusiasm: 0

Assertiveness: 1

Under Agreeableness

Compassion: 0

Politeness: 65

Under Neuroticism

Volatility: 100

Withdrawal: 100

Third Test Roommate's Perspective:

Openness to experience: 16

Conscientiousness: 1

Extroversion: 19

Agreeableness: 0

Neuroticism: 100

Under Openness to Experience

Intellect: 9

Openness: 41

Under Conscientiousness

Industriousness: 0

Orderliness: 16

Under Extroversion

Enthusiasm: 24

Assertiveness: 22

Under Agreeableness

Compassion: 0

Politeness: 1

Under Neuroticism

Volatility: 100

Withdrawal: 100

What I am most worried about is the no Compassion. I am a new Christian and having no compassion is the exact opposite of what I need to be. The weird thing is, I can't watch anything sad happen to someone. I can't handle watching people upset or crying. I get extremely sad and affected for them. I can't watch sad movies or listen to sad songs. I feel that I have a lot of empathy, especially if it is something I can understand.

But... how broken am I with results like these? The test is from bigfiveaspects dot com.

WARNING: Skip to the last section for the Criticism

3...

2...

1...

Jung's Dying Foretelling of "Final Apocalypse"

Reddit as a Tool

Politics is not a fair game. Nevertheless, even against this unfairness and the complexity of the abstract system, many will be loathe to miss out on playing their character, even if they find other, more practical grounds (perhaps without realizing!) upon which to resolve their problem(s). (Though, if a man finds no other way, his course surely sets him to become grumbling and old, rendered weak and insecure by his impotency [which he medicates self-destructively]; in strict contempt of changes to a battleground the front lines of which he's never witnessed -- that ignorance is always possible when relying on abstract games.)

Impotency

Those who are consequently unsatisfied with self immateriality, or who sense their own impotence but wish never to articulately acknowledge it, will seek out experiences like Reddit -- where no man interacts with another, but engages with images (e.g. of a crowd, or an outstanding [for whatever reason] person), while a drama (e.g. of group versus group, etc.) formulates those images into an apparatus -- substituting the abstract fruit from this platform for the tastes he could have in the real world. If there is any doubt that the avatar of 'redditor' is ensconced in a drama, the emotionality, implicit and explicit, abundant throughout the comment sections and intrinsic to the post make it clear. All that's to say, I posit that drama-predicated images constantly play (that is right: like a film); that they are an innate, subconscious motivator; indistinguishable from human imagination; and, therefore, a fundamental utility in the human toolkit.

The immaterial cries out from below, where perception is weakest to yield/interpret anything when sent out -- and makes us desperate to deposit its seeds into fertile soil, as the voice of potential itself calling one to a journey. There is attraction, but explanation can be swiftly passed off to instinct, especially if the facts are disagreeable to one's self-image: one will never comprehend what he is doing [in this place] and endlessly question himself when he feels his mark is missed. None of that is desirable.

Peterson's Aim

In Jung's The Undiscovered Self, in the first chapter "The Plight of the Individual in Modern Society", he writes:

Rational argument can be conducted with some prospect of success only so long as the emotionality of a given situation does not exceed a certain critical degree. If the affective temperature rises above this level, the possibility of reason's having any effect ceases and its place is taken by slogans and chimerical wish-fantasies. That is to say, a sort of collective possession results which rapidly develops into a psychic epidemic....In this broad belt of unconsciousness, which is immune to conscious criticism and control, we stand defenseless, open to all kinds of influences and psychic infections. As with all dangers, we can guard against the risk of psychic infection only when we know what is attacking us, and how, where and when the attack will come.

This makes it seem stupidly obvious that the crowd of protesters does not, of course, arrive to argue, as it is driven primarily by emotion and conceals what personally significant meaning can be gleaned from its members with/as the legitimate message of an organization.

In reading through the entirety of the first chapter of The Undiscovered Self, I would contend that Peterson has taken significant influence in terms of where the modern threat comes from, and, indeed, you can hear, in the video linked above, that the title of his recent book is spoken aloud, verbatim.

Criticism

Admittedly authored by conjecture, in light of these facts I make a criticism of approach addressed to this subreddit, which has seemed to contend itself with carrying out -- or wishing to do so -- an offensive toward an abstract image of an immoral figure or group of people, and calling itself "reasonable" in doing so. I find that the general spirit behind the content produced here is influenced by the same kind of figure, which people use to reinvent the community's purpose in creative ways. No doubt, this "figure" is JP's own adversary. But much has gone stale in the supply, no?

Beyond the threshold of reason's fruitful effect, it cannot serve as a faithful tool in bolstering oneself in the common juxtaposition made when facing "trolls" or "proselytes": One rationalizes, "Well, I am being reasonable, and they are not; I have no need for a change in direction." The statement is adopted and deemed sufficient by both sides, and demonstrates, when used, a lack of understanding of himself or his opposition; for one does best to craft an argument that is informed by the adversary, and he updates his arsenal only through confrontation with that adversary.

• "Success isn't about knowledge or talent, but the art of convincing others you have both."
• "Don't be a hero, the graveyard is full of them."
• "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind? No, it doesn't, it makes us even."
• "Sorry, I can't make it, I have plans. My plan is to find something better to do."
• "Be prepared, lost footballs, Moses, and piss heads have all been found whilst looking through the bushes and weeds."
• "Knowledge, facts, figures can all be learned, but wisdom can only be experienced upon reflection."
• "True compassion isn't colluding in delusion; it's guiding someone to their true self."
• "To live a life without regret would be a regret in itself."
• "Never underestimate the usefulness of a force replacing your will."
• "When cynicism eclipses wonder, the soul begins to wither."

Hi everyone! I wrote an article on rehabilitating our understanding of fate that I think many of you would enjoy. Here's the opening:

By the early date of 1830, Alexis de Tocqueville had already uncovered the tensions that lie within democracy. He saw that although the gap between rich and poor was smaller than ever, the new closeness bred hatred where there had once been mutual respect. Now, only force could keep the peace. He concluded in despair: “Each feels the ill, but no one has the courage and energy needed to seek something better . . . we have destroyed an aristocratic society, and having stopped complacently amid the debris of the former edifice, we seem to want to settle there forever.” As Teslas glide past tent cities in Los Angeles, the West still stands paralyzed at the end of history.

Here's the article

Immigration is not simply a matter of economics or culture; it has direct implications for public safety. While most immigrants are law-abiding individuals, it is undeniable that unregulated immigration can introduce risks, such as:

• Criminal Activity: Without proper vetting, individuals with violent or criminal histories could enter a country and harm its citizens.

• Public Health Risks: Unchecked immigration can lead to the spread of diseases that may not be prevalent in the host country.

• Economic Strain Leading to Instability: Overwhelmed social services or job markets can create conditions ripe for societal unrest.

If we regulate businesses to ensure their products don’t harm consumers, why would we not regulate immigration to ensure that new entrants don’t harm citizens?

Counterarguments Addressed

1. “Most immigrants are harmless.”

• True, but most products on the market are also harmless. Yet, we still regulate them because even a small percentage of harmful cases justifies precautionary measures.

2. “Regulating immigration is discriminatory.”

• Ensuring public safety isn’t about discrimination; it’s about due diligence. Just as inspecting products isn’t an attack on manufacturers but a safeguard for consumers, vetting immigrants isn’t an attack on individuals but a safeguard for citizens.

3. “Immigration benefits society overall.”

• Even beneficial industries like pharmaceuticals are heavily regulated because benefits don’t negate risks. Immigration can bring benefits, but only if managed responsibly.

https://youtu.be/yZYQpge1W5s?si=6qH8K5quzbtAkKgf

I'm not sure why but I also get agitated watching this interview.

I realized something recently while researching of ways to get healthier in the new year, and it may come off like sarcasm or too sweeping of a generalization but I wasn't sure how else to ask or explain it. Poultry and some red meat (that you should cook yourself), eggs, fish, fruits, vegetables, nuts, and seeds, beans, water, unsweet tea, all even more ideally straight from the source and local farm.

It seems like this is the biggest takeaway because whenever I see a list or people post pictures of their fridge full of foods or drinks (let alone sugar, salt, sauces, mayo, dressing, etc), it seems like basically anything that is not one of those initial things is singled out for being unhealthy in one way or another.

Starting at 5 min

https://youtu.be/rkhzYPfMfcE?si=9eZkMwHi51CSqfn-

I don’t find women who have tattoos to be particularly attractive and feminine. They cover a woman’s body and basically defaces an otherwise feminine body. There are some men who like it and I am not one of them.

This isn’t just an issue for physical attraction but also for work as well. I would be very careful who I hire and what they look like when I put them in a client facing role. Why? Tattoos are just not professional and makes the folks who get them to look cheap and low class.

https://amp.theguardian.com/fashion/shortcuts/2019/sep/04/people-with-tattoos-are-reckless-and-impulsive-just-look-at-the-mucky-splodge-on-my-arm

I want to watch his lectures, and learn what he is teaching.

What I see/find now is 5 to 10 minutes snippets of his lectures on YouTube. Is there I way I can watch/learn his full lessons?

The homeless are an obvious one but what others are there ? The nuclear family ? The "education" system ?

The education system it seems to me is not really about education it's about child minding. And I think it's a colossal waste of time and resources for the most part and does a lot more harm than good. Concentration camps are not a good idea !

I’m having it. Here’s why:

• Drunk driving. The car went into a ditch and was demolished
• Have had four intimate partners and cheated on three of them.
• Grabbed a girls ass and got beaten up by her boyfriend.
• Provoked a girl and got beaten up by her brother.
• Numbers of black-outs under influence of alcohol
• Under influence of alcohol peed myself at several (ex)-friends places.
• Published a long text arguing for the existence of God on social media
• Speaking to ’non-believers’ about the existence of God under influence of amphetamine.

The last 10 years feel kind of foggy. My memory is not what it used to be before addiction.

I’ve been a disaster. Been sober for almost two years, attending AA meetings. Trying to pray a lot and sometimes having walks around the lake picking up garbage. Asked people for forgiveness and trying to be generous giving gifts. But it’s not enough. I wish I could change the past. But I can’t. How do I deal with all this?

Quite stunning videos and i’m wondering how they do it?

Fan since bill C-16. Beneficiary of his teachings. In the middle politically. Straight. That’s me before you put me in a box.

I’m blocked from seeing his posts because I had the gall to question when he said “give em hell natanyahu”. It seems to me that supporting the world’s biggest war hawk is something worth criticizing him over.