Confused By T's Reaction

[Sideways]

@scout86 - I grew up with a dad who's high on the aspergers spectrum. He stores crazy amounts of information in his head, and I don't think that he needs everyone else to have their facts straight all the time, he's just not very socially adept. So his sole contribution to a lot of conversations is correcting the incorrect, and then elaborating with crazy amounts of detail on any topic under the sun.

There are some things that I'm grateful he corrects me about. If some GP had just told me chocolate causes migraines, it's really handy that he'll correct that. I suffer from migraines- I need my info on them to be right. Less handy that he'll then start some speech about migraines and chocolate and little neurons in the brain and on and on.

It gets tiring. I'm okay with it, because I know he's not taking a dig at me, it's just the only way he knows how to contribute to a conversation.

But when you ask if I'm okay with living with wrong info in my head generally? Totally. Doesn't bother me at all. Things that matter to me, I want to have my facts straight. Whether or not my version of how lighting and thunder are created is even remotely scientific? Couldn't care less. One day it may make for an interesting conversation with someone. Probably not. But knowing that my grade 2 version of clouds bash together and cause thunder probably isn't true? So what!

There's a big grey area in between the things I want to have right, and the things where I don't care if I'm wrong. And what I need to have right changes over time. But I'll never be right about everything, and that is so okay with me.

The motivations and tactics people have for correcting me when I'm wrong, though - that matters. If it's a put down, if they're trying to make me feel stupid? I don't like that much.

 

[Sideways]

Thought about it, and I'd go one step further.

Mum always said that you don't talk politics or religion at the dinner table. With those 2 topics, I'd actually say that being right about facts, and making sure everyone else is right about their facts, is something that should be done carefully, if at all, and only at the right time with the right person.

When I get into a convo with a fundamentalist Christian, I just wouldn't start trying to persuade them that Adam & Eve and the Garden of Eden is nothing more than a fable to teach about morality and our existence.

The scientific community has done a pretty good job of persuading me that woman was not created by some deity ripping out a man's rib. Correcting the Christian on that point, there's a good chance they're going to see that as me disrespecting their faith. And more than likely, their religious beliefs really aren't about "facts" at all. It doesn't matter to them if Adam & Eve is bogus - and being factually correct about that completely misses the point about why they believe in God at all.

Much the same with political ideology.

There is a time and a place for conversation about religion and politics. But appreciating that in those 2 areas, personal belief and values are often more important than fact, it's often just more respectful to let the Christian be with their oddball beliefs. Because it doesn't matter to me what they believe, but it matters a lot to them.

Sometimes, talking facts on religion and politics is appropriate. But I think even at those times, you tread carefully you know?

 

[scout86]

But when you ask if I'm okay with living with wrong info in my head generally? Totally. Doesn't bother me at all.

I've got to tell you, when I read that, something in the depths of my brain screamed in terror. LOL (Actually, maybe that's not really funny.) Stuff like that doesn't happen too often but that....... Well, that was interesting.

And, that thought is so alarming, I'm not even going ask how that works. Don't want to think about it. At least not right now.

The motivations and tactics people have for correcting me when I'm wrong, though - that matters. If it's a put down, if they're trying to make me feel stupid? I don't like that much.

I can see where you wouldn't like that very much. I wouldn't either, but I don't know that it would occur to me as a potential motive either. I think I'd probably miss that. But, this might have something to do with issues I've had with some people. That's definitely worth thinking about. I'm not too sure how I go about knowing how this works for other people. Any ideas?

The more I've thought about this, like @Friday kind of referenced earlier, this might be a variation on the theme of hypervigilance.

 

[Sideways]

I've got to tell you, when I read that, something in the depths of my brain screamed in terror.

If it helps at all, the idea that I'd need all the information in my head to be completely correct at all times - wow! How does that work!? I can see the connection with hypervigilence. Maybe it's irrelevant, but a large part of my trauma was being able to believe things that sounded pretty bogus. Being able to do that was how I survived. Maybe that's why it doesn't bother me so much...

 

[scout86]

How does that work!?

Sometimes it can be pretty stressful. :D That's probably why 'stress' is one of the things I learned to ignore.

My situation was kind of the opposite. I was under the impression that the way to be safe was to be 'right'. With the added twist that one of the rules of the game, which I didn't get, was that I couldn't be right.

 

[Sideways]

@scout86 - at some point in everyone's life, they get corrected that pumpkins are actually a fruit, not a vegetable.

I reckon I could count on one hand the number of people who's lives were meaningfully altered by being corrected on that. Sometimes being wrong about stuff just doesn't seem to matter. Why is it that we all get corrected about pumpkins being a fruit, it a vegetable? I didn't care when I thought it was a vegetable, and knowing that I was wrong about that for years? Still don't care!

 

[Intrepid]

@scout86 - at some point in everyone's life, they get corrected that pumpkins...

Pumpkins are gourds, right? And I really don't care either.

 

[scout86]

Actually, they're a kind of squash........ :D

 

[Abstract]

I don't have time to answer properly sadly! And I haven't had the chance to catch up on these later posts so excuse if I mess up or are missing the point. All I can say scout is that I have realised I tried to create a safety blanket around myself with facts. Obsessively. I temper actually correcting people so that hasn't (usually) been a problem for me. But internally its a different matter. Around 4 years ago I decided it was a problem and have been trying to loosen it up since. Other times I have realised how grateful I am that I used this as one of my coping mechanisms. I think its a variation on intellectulisation. It formed little capsules around situations, interpersonal connection, distanced me from my emotions and other people ( :alien: ). It is a lot about self doubt too. Hugely. I grew up having my internal and external perception of reality being messed with so desperately looking for facts to lean against is enormously seductive. I wouldn't have coped with the therapy I had as well as I did (clears throat) without obsessively researching and checking things all the time. It was my anchor and lifeline literally at times. The only secure point for my sanity.

Correcting others can of course also be an attempt to control or dominate even if in a very subtle and indirect way. An attempt to make the world right. It doesn't sound like anyone on here is doing it that way though.

I do agree with what Ragdoll circus and suzitig said. I do think looking at the most important thing in that context is the best way to approach things generally.

I had a friend who is a mathematics philosopher. Facts are not so absolute if you really get down to it. Talking to her would totally scramble my brain. I think rational thought is hugely important and a gift. I will never change my mind about that. But for me I am trying to go beyond this a bit because for me I think the amount I have used it is a hindrance in various ways.

 

[Sideways]

Squash, like zucchini - also fruit? Think so. Am I the slightest bit concerned that maybe I'm wrong? Nup! I don't have a working definition of what a 'gourd' even is. Years and years I've been living a lie, in complete ignorance about the correct scientific classification of pumpkins, and today I learn maybe I'm still wrong!?!

I don't even like pumpkin. Care factor: 0!

 

[Gs172003]

@scout86 - at some point in everyone's life, they get corrected that pumpkins...

Are we talking about tomatoes? Hehe!

 

[BlueOrange]

And, that thought is so alarming, I'm not even going ask how that works. Don't want to think about it. At least not right now

In that paragraph, you've said a thing that feels wrong to me. It also seems clear that if I correct you (from my POV), then I will hurt a relationship that I value.

Leaving aside how to feel about inaccuracy, this tells us that sometimes it hurts relationships when we take action about inaccuracy. Because it can hurt people.

How do we know what will hurt someone before we do it? With great difficulty. Which is why many people choose not to risk it at all.

I am much better off because of the many people here who would prefer that I experience the pain of adjusting my thoughts, instead of the pains caused by a view of the world that hurts me. (Even though sometimes the thought-adjustment pain seems unbearable.)

Someone from the army once told me about 'candour culture' - that the military places a high value on honest communication because inaccuracies cost lives. As a civilian with a dissociative disorder, inaccuracies can cost me my life in a different, more subtle way.

Most people don't experience the pressure to be honest as powerfully as we do.