Nonsense - not that I really know what Asperger's is exactly - but I don't see how anyone would see one action as intentional, and the other not - in both cases, the guy says exactly the same thing.
If you fiddle about with the parameters so that the relative cost/benefits are much greater/less -you get entirely different results (say instead of a free cup and -$1, you replace with £1,000,000 and decapitation) then maybe there's cause for intention (winning a prize being a happy, if unexpected bonus, while instant death an avoidable unpleasantness) while lessening the cost/benefits (say +1p vs -1p) lessens the case for there being intention. What's missing is the context - and the boundary at which a cost outweighs the perceived benefit seems a little arbitrary - apparently anyone with plenty of cash and plenty of cups is a potential Asperger's.
I notice that in the first example, the guy makes his purchase regardless of the benefit or feature attached when that unique (?qualifier) item does not affect his purchase. I mean, the sales guy could have used the term "mega" as a simple adjective, just as he could have said "the largest size is a blue cup" rather than a collectable cup. I mean, I don't care what the cup says about me unless I can't figure out how to hold it right side up.
In the second vignette, the guy makes his purchase regardless of paying some soda jerk an extra dollar for the trouble of making the larger smoothee. If you miss this, you probably have no feelings and therefore probably are autistic.
To be fair, the author of the study had I'm sure not intended (sic) to be mean to Aspergers sufferers. It would be easy enough to show that a person of less than average social competence would fail to grasp that two 50¢ cups hold 16 ounces but one $1.50 cup holds 12 ounces, and 'duh' to that.
Hm. I would rate the paying the extra dollar as unintentional as well - Joe didn't care how much the drink cost, even though buying it was clearly intentional.
Having frequently been in that kind of situation myself. There's a joke, of sorts, that I know that goes: "A woman will buy a two dollar item she doesn't want on sale for one dollar. A man will buy a one dollar item that he does want on sale for two dollars."
Nonsense - not that I really know what Asperger's is exactly - but I don't see how anyone would see one action as intentional, and the other not - in both cases, the guy says exactly the same thing.
ReplyDeleteIf you fiddle about with the parameters so that the relative cost/benefits are much greater/less -you get entirely different results (say instead of a free cup and -$1, you replace with £1,000,000 and decapitation) then maybe there's cause for intention (winning a prize being a happy, if unexpected bonus, while instant death an avoidable unpleasantness) while lessening the cost/benefits (say +1p vs -1p) lessens the case for there being intention. What's missing is the context - and the boundary at which a cost outweighs the perceived benefit seems a little arbitrary - apparently anyone with plenty of cash and plenty of cups is a potential Asperger's.
Maybe you don't have Asperger's?
ReplyDeleteI notice that in the first example, the guy makes his purchase regardless of the benefit or feature attached when that unique (?qualifier) item does not affect his purchase. I mean, the sales guy could have used the term "mega" as a simple adjective, just as he could have said "the largest size is a blue cup" rather than a collectable cup. I mean, I don't care what the cup says about me unless I can't figure out how to hold it right side up.
ReplyDeleteIn the second vignette, the guy makes his purchase regardless of paying some soda jerk an extra dollar for the trouble of making the larger smoothee. If you miss this, you probably have no feelings and therefore probably are autistic.
To be fair, the author of the study had I'm sure not intended (sic) to be mean to Aspergers sufferers. It would be easy enough to show that a person of less than average social competence would fail to grasp that two 50¢ cups hold 16 ounces but one $1.50 cup holds 12 ounces, and 'duh' to that.
Hm. I would rate the paying the extra dollar as unintentional as well - Joe didn't care how much the drink cost, even though buying it was clearly intentional.
ReplyDeleteHaving frequently been in that kind of situation myself. There's a joke, of sorts, that I know that goes: "A woman will buy a two dollar item she doesn't want on sale for one dollar. A man will buy a one dollar item that he does want on sale for two dollars."