Geeks and the "herd"...

Ramanujan

I've been thinking about my post on autism. 

Clearly there is an interesting but perhaps blurry line between what today is considered a modern 'geek' (someone who is unfashionable or socially inept) and someone with Asperger's Syndrome.

What seems clear after some thought is that there are sort of two 'camps" in society: geeks and non-geeks.  Non-geeks being those that are socially adept or fashionable.

I started to think about the little on-line autism test I took and the questions it asked:

Do I enjoy social chitchat?


Do I think people listening to me are getting bored?

Was this test created by high school cheerleaders or social debutantes?  Why is "being social" so important I started to wonder?

After all I have never been voted "most popular" yet I have managed success in life and business and, yes, I do have friends... I personally know lots of folks far geekier than me who are also successful in life and business (guys with 50-pin connectors hanging out of their wall sockets with high-speed clock signals on them, guys that only eat on kind of food for lunch, always wear the same clothes, that sort of thing).

So what really makes geeks so different, and different from whom?

What separates a really geeky person from someone who has autism...?

After some reflection I began to believe that the vast majority of people in the world (at least outside geekdome) measure their self worth by comparing their social status with others.  While this seems obvious to non-geeks, geeks on the there hand, use different criteria.

At least for guys its a question of things like intellectual prowess: Issac Newton, Bill Gates, Ramanujan.  Mathematics, computer science and physics are not known for their social aspects (though there are always exceptions like Richard Feynman).

Geeks can compete with each other on video games, with calculus, physics, computer hacking, and any number of similar activities - all without any real social skill.  There are a number of books on the life of "hackers" for example, (see Steven Levy's Hackers), where perhaps the most socially outcast create technologies on which the rest of societies daily life comes to depend.  Who wins depends on skill, logic, cleverness - not social stature, and no one cares what you look like, how you're dressed, or is your hair combed.

The skills used by geeks involve, to a large degree, logic, visualization, focus and imagination.  Of course, depending on they kind of geek that you are this may vary.  But in general I think that all geeks are able to "focus" on what they are interested in so intently that they literally forget about and/or don't care about anything else.

(Newton, while developing calculus, was said to spend all his time in his room with others bringing him food - for many months on end.  No time for socialization, debutante balls, etc.)

And while most non-geeks would have no clue what would be missing from the world had calculus not been invented its safe to say that there would not be a modern world without it.

Geeks can also turn their social emotions off to do certain activities, e.g., mathematics.  This allows them total focus on the problem at hand without distraction.

On the other hand, there are clearly problems at a certain point on the autism spectrum - problems that cannot be fully explained simply by intense focus.  (Yet in books like "Born on a Blue Day" its clear that focus and control over focus is clearly an issue to some degree and it can also be overcome.)

I think that the tests, like the one I linked last post, do a large disservice to autism and Asperger's.

To me, from the geek perspective, I don't care what others think about me or how I look.  I am not good at determining "social clues". 

But that does not make me ill.

It does separate me from the rest of the "herd" - but without me and others like me society would not progress in technical areas (cheerleaders and debutantes not being known for the prowess in calculus and physics, for example).

I think that geekdom allows you to escape from the "herd mentality" of wanting to be "like" everyone else.  Imagine a world where there were no geeks - everyone would only worry about their social status - kind of like a dog pack or flock of peacocks.  There would be no technological advancement because to develop technology one would have to break out of the "herd" mode.

A geek is free of the trappings of social stature - which allows him to focus totally on a particular issue or problem.   Something typical herd members cannot do because being part of the herd requires constant focus on social stature issues - do I look good, is my hair in place, etc.

And the "herd" does not like those that are different - they stand out for good or bad - and make everyone trying to fit in uncomfortable with their differences.

I think geekdom is driven by biology and, just like all things biological, sometimes the genes takes things too far - and you have true autism - people who cannot escape their own "focus".  Their inward focus is like a black hole and they are past the event horizon and forever falling in.

Geeks, on the other hand, have the same "focus" black hole but live on the other side of the event horizon - near enough to see it, perhaps even touching it or crossing over (and maybe coming back).  Because we may act like or similar to those that have crossed the line (those with true autism) we are labeled unfairly in the same way.