- Joined
- Mar 22, 2025
- Messages
- 854
- Thread Author
- #1
Hello. This is a thread about my attempt to summate the logic behind NT/neurotypicality.
This is not a post with the purpose of challenging common beliefs, ironically, this is only my new set of empirical models aimed at explaining NT as a science and the subsequent explanations for social skills with sophistication. There are a lot of water beliefs here so if you don’t enjoy reading water, you shouldn’t read (although, it’s not like the majority of daily threads aren’t repetitive anyway). There is a necessary evil in touching upon common water ideas as a younger person, especially in coop with others, as it is an exercise to solidify one’s beliefs in logic and confirm that one doesn’t carry any misconceptions; it’s an exercise indicating a coming of age or a new stage of maturity and one that I have chosen to pursue out of a quick boredom.
Part I: General Definitions
Catchers and Setters are the two general classes which can be found within the social hierarchy system, where the names reflect their roles; type 0 is Catchers, the base class, who receive the input that the Setters broadcast or present and process it to establish a new common understanding of the ideology; type 1 are the Setters, who have the ball in their court and ‘set’ it using their skillset. Both roles are genetically determined as is the common trend with human characteristics, and the rarity of a Setter is incredibly high due to requiring a long series of low-probability circumstances to be met to form the environment needed to habilitate a Setter type individual.
We will not be using the definition of NT that is ‘the ability to fit in’, as fitting in is a central behaviour of one of the classes in our system, not the ability defining the roles of the system itself.
NT = measure of the ability to identify, understand, and build upon aspects of social situations.
Status quo = the opinion submitted by Setters and approved of by Catchers, typically widely accepted, long-held beliefs.
Next we will look further into the details concerning definitions of the two skill classes.
Part II: Catchers and Setters
These two types have traits observable in almost every human behaviour, as the majority of actions which a person performs within a normal day would concern social interaction, and the mental processing of stimuli.
Here is a fundamental list I wrote of common characteristics possessed by each class, labeled with either I or M to signify whether Intelligence or Mindset/environment is the quantity/factor primarily related:
Catchers:
Catchers have significant divisions within their caste seeing as the group marks such a large variance of people; there are Catchers who possess intellectual capabilities or techniques making them equal to a slightly inferior version of Setters, and use their second-rate skills to act in dominant positions as mock Setters where there may be no true ones present, fulfilling hierarchical roles such as providing the group with correct opinions, dispelling faulty logic within lower Catchers’ submissions to the thought pool, and other related tasks. Conversely there are low-intelligence Catchers who only possess a rudimentary ability to make sense of social contexts, and rely solely on their in-group status and agreeing with the status quo to remain in their position.
Now moving onto the traits of Setters:
The catcher’s capabilities compared to the setters are analogous to a primitive computer versus a high-processing computer. The Setter’s ability to handle large varieties of information at impressive levels is what allows them to not only glide through the interactions of daily life, but also to have such a significant impact on the development of thoughts of all under their influence, which is why they are typically hailed as idols of philosophy, or heads of their time’s movement. A largely modern effect that has been emphasized by the flaws within the educational system is that Catchers and Setters alike are rarely encouraged to pursue a personal journey in the development of their ideology and instead rely on referrals to the common opinion rather than literature by past Setters which are proofread, built off humanity’s past work, and therefore contain the definitively agreeable angles on most topics, saving a lot of time so as to quell any immaturities or misguided beliefs for the young reader. Setters may require that upbringing as well, but usually already possess those same mature beliefs due to either having read a lot in adolescence or having formed the opinions themselves. Catchers will never contribute to the progression of a philosophical invention without being members of a movement: their individual power is insufficient. However, it may be possible for select high-caste Catchers with a good mindset focused towards efficient learning and critical discussion, to refine the movement’s details, especially Catchers who have received a good education as well as being well-read. The relevance to this was mentioned before.
Most importantly, this potential mock-Setter idol must possess the drive to inspire others, to challenge the status quo, and to move towards progression just like a proper Setter would; This is another quality neglected within modern men and the failure to address has been a recognized issue.
By reading about these traits you should be able to identify elements which match observations of people from your own life. I will leave the section of connecting common life scenarios to these aspects, for a following post. But basic takeaways from the two definitions are:
1. Catchers are not usually stupid or intellectually incapable. They tend to be ignorant.
2. Setters exist mainly in the stuff of myth or legacy.
The catcher is usually able to recognize their superior Setter when one does exist within the system. However they may be mistaken about their own class, more specifically, a Catcher raised a certain way tends to incorrectly assess their own skillset.
Part III: Reflections
I have written the bulk of what I wanted this first post to contain. Other sections can be made in further additions to the thread but for now I will conclude the presented ideas with a few non-sequitur clarifications relating to other intertwined topics.
Every misconstrued statement, and therefore arguments, on forums stem from an indifference in posting or a failure to provide necessary information which forms erroneous ideas that may not be perceived as desired by others. It is the Setter’s job to ensure that all their presented ideas do not fail this obligation, and that they correct holes in logic of erroneous Catcher statements using their superior ability to recognize how the original Catcher may have incorrectly formed their conclusion. A recurring issue among forum posters are Catchers who ineffectively use their extrapolation techniques and procure a false statement which they then defend until logic is used to dismiss it.
People commonly debate whether you need IQ or not to be NT. This model clarifies it, you don’t need high IQ to be a recognized/accepted Catcher, but it is one of many requirements in order to be a Setter.
Neurotypicality is a measurable quantity, however complex, and social interactions are a science. It’s intuitive, and can be analyzed empirically, and an individual’s success in studying academic sciences is a good predictor of how much NT they possess because all of these require the same skillset of inquisitive, analytical traits. Building off this logic, being NT is not a skill one magically gains by being Chad.
NT runs alongside looks, the relations between these two factors and the others which form the equation of how an individual fares within a social system is too complicated to be explained in such a simple way like NT is. The common understanding for how they interact still functions well to explain it for now. Chad is at the top NT or not. NT can bring you high but it can’t make you Chad. etc etc.
Experience as a quantity cannot be substituted for NT to determine one’s class, seeing as NT as the measure is largely genetically determined. However it does have many interactions with the NT ability to decide.
Part IV: Questions!
I hope in our conclusion you have thoughts of your own to contribute to this discussion. Some questions which may arise within your mind are:
1. Have you found relatability in reading about the traits of a Catcher or higher tier Catcher? Have you been living in a surrendered state where your ideology was so shaped by defeat that you no longer possess the will to build upon the work of others, or to engage in discussion which challenges you?
2. What might the topics discussed here imply for a strategy purposed towards learning as a Catcher? This model explains a status quo built by modern times. Do you believe people have what it takes to ascend beyond the status quo? Can we achieve a system where new learners are made capable of producing effective change and equal contributions? More simply, how do we as a forum community work with this new model as we continue to understand it further, in order to create a progressive culture where creative thought is commonplace or increased?
Sorry again if you found ts hard to read, I am not exactly an expert in writing scientific analysis so the jargon may be clunky and over the top.
If the interest is enough, the next post will be about connecting theory to application, as in, finding extensions of the model within real life cases and relationships. Otherwise, thank you for reading.
Tags:
@Suigin Trismegistus
@pariah
@Sorcerer's Dream
This is not a post with the purpose of challenging common beliefs, ironically, this is only my new set of empirical models aimed at explaining NT as a science and the subsequent explanations for social skills with sophistication. There are a lot of water beliefs here so if you don’t enjoy reading water, you shouldn’t read (although, it’s not like the majority of daily threads aren’t repetitive anyway). There is a necessary evil in touching upon common water ideas as a younger person, especially in coop with others, as it is an exercise to solidify one’s beliefs in logic and confirm that one doesn’t carry any misconceptions; it’s an exercise indicating a coming of age or a new stage of maturity and one that I have chosen to pursue out of a quick boredom.
Part I: General Definitions
Catchers and Setters are the two general classes which can be found within the social hierarchy system, where the names reflect their roles; type 0 is Catchers, the base class, who receive the input that the Setters broadcast or present and process it to establish a new common understanding of the ideology; type 1 are the Setters, who have the ball in their court and ‘set’ it using their skillset. Both roles are genetically determined as is the common trend with human characteristics, and the rarity of a Setter is incredibly high due to requiring a long series of low-probability circumstances to be met to form the environment needed to habilitate a Setter type individual.
We will not be using the definition of NT that is ‘the ability to fit in’, as fitting in is a central behaviour of one of the classes in our system, not the ability defining the roles of the system itself.
NT = measure of the ability to identify, understand, and build upon aspects of social situations.
Status quo = the opinion submitted by Setters and approved of by Catchers, typically widely accepted, long-held beliefs.
Next we will look further into the details concerning definitions of the two skill classes.
Part II: Catchers and Setters
These two types have traits observable in almost every human behaviour, as the majority of actions which a person performs within a normal day would concern social interaction, and the mental processing of stimuli.
Here is a fundamental list I wrote of common characteristics possessed by each class, labeled with either I or M to signify whether Intelligence or Mindset/environment is the quantity/factor primarily related:
Catchers:
- Able to identify and understand simple trends, reasoning between intertrend relationships when presented to them, derive simple conclusions (I)
- Worldview shape is an index of categorized information able to be retrieved at relevant contexts (I/M)
- Doesn’t possess an intrinsic motivation to think for themselves or challenge the status quo (I/M)
- Places significant value in the status quo when made to dedicate expansive thought to their ‘own’ ideas. A common variation on this is where a Catcher is equally unfamiliar with both a newly introduced idea opposing their worldview, and the logic behind their worldview’s imported belief relevant to the topic, and they choose to remain in their worldview rather than delve into a comparison as to logically find the correct answer. (M)
- When in a situation where they are required to form novel thoughts or elaborate on their carried beliefs, they are only able to provide an explanation which has also been imported from the mouths of Setters, or else they can only state the base argument and refuse to elaborate. They may also extrapolate conclusive results using the logic of arguments that they do know in detail, to a varying degree of success. (I/M)
- Usually doesn’t venture beyond the subject matter of what they already possess knowledge for. (M)
- Fundamentally places a respect in authority above the respect for themselves, done both consciously or subconsciously (M)
Catchers have significant divisions within their caste seeing as the group marks such a large variance of people; there are Catchers who possess intellectual capabilities or techniques making them equal to a slightly inferior version of Setters, and use their second-rate skills to act in dominant positions as mock Setters where there may be no true ones present, fulfilling hierarchical roles such as providing the group with correct opinions, dispelling faulty logic within lower Catchers’ submissions to the thought pool, and other related tasks. Conversely there are low-intelligence Catchers who only possess a rudimentary ability to make sense of social contexts, and rely solely on their in-group status and agreeing with the status quo to remain in their position.
While it should be an easy truth that most of us on the forum are low tier catchers, I still find it irritating that you grazing cattle would choose to comment “Femcel = chad only” on a new reddit crosspost like it hasn’t been done countless times before, rather than indulge your mind with fresh material. It’s this exact reason that will cause this thread to receive virtually no reception.
Now moving onto the traits of Setters:
- Easily grasps trends of varying complexity and their derivatives, leading to a more whole understanding of concepts and a firm grasp on multivariate contexts (I)
- Receives positive reinforcement at a young age and consequently is encouraged to learn, question and practice ideation (M)
- Worldview shape is of a dynamic system, where relationships between variables form the understanding of concepts and new information processed notifies the values of affected variables to change accordingly (I)
- Understands presentation well, selects their ideas according to what the recipient would most like to hear. Possesses a keen grasp of their language and can consequently present ideas concisely.
- Possesses the innate desire to leave an impact on the world and others. (M)
The catcher’s capabilities compared to the setters are analogous to a primitive computer versus a high-processing computer. The Setter’s ability to handle large varieties of information at impressive levels is what allows them to not only glide through the interactions of daily life, but also to have such a significant impact on the development of thoughts of all under their influence, which is why they are typically hailed as idols of philosophy, or heads of their time’s movement. A largely modern effect that has been emphasized by the flaws within the educational system is that Catchers and Setters alike are rarely encouraged to pursue a personal journey in the development of their ideology and instead rely on referrals to the common opinion rather than literature by past Setters which are proofread, built off humanity’s past work, and therefore contain the definitively agreeable angles on most topics, saving a lot of time so as to quell any immaturities or misguided beliefs for the young reader. Setters may require that upbringing as well, but usually already possess those same mature beliefs due to either having read a lot in adolescence or having formed the opinions themselves. Catchers will never contribute to the progression of a philosophical invention without being members of a movement: their individual power is insufficient. However, it may be possible for select high-caste Catchers with a good mindset focused towards efficient learning and critical discussion, to refine the movement’s details, especially Catchers who have received a good education as well as being well-read. The relevance to this was mentioned before.
Most importantly, this potential mock-Setter idol must possess the drive to inspire others, to challenge the status quo, and to move towards progression just like a proper Setter would; This is another quality neglected within modern men and the failure to address has been a recognized issue.
By reading about these traits you should be able to identify elements which match observations of people from your own life. I will leave the section of connecting common life scenarios to these aspects, for a following post. But basic takeaways from the two definitions are:
1. Catchers are not usually stupid or intellectually incapable. They tend to be ignorant.
2. Setters exist mainly in the stuff of myth or legacy.
The catcher is usually able to recognize their superior Setter when one does exist within the system. However they may be mistaken about their own class, more specifically, a Catcher raised a certain way tends to incorrectly assess their own skillset.
Part III: Reflections
I have written the bulk of what I wanted this first post to contain. Other sections can be made in further additions to the thread but for now I will conclude the presented ideas with a few non-sequitur clarifications relating to other intertwined topics.
Every misconstrued statement, and therefore arguments, on forums stem from an indifference in posting or a failure to provide necessary information which forms erroneous ideas that may not be perceived as desired by others. It is the Setter’s job to ensure that all their presented ideas do not fail this obligation, and that they correct holes in logic of erroneous Catcher statements using their superior ability to recognize how the original Catcher may have incorrectly formed their conclusion. A recurring issue among forum posters are Catchers who ineffectively use their extrapolation techniques and procure a false statement which they then defend until logic is used to dismiss it.
People commonly debate whether you need IQ or not to be NT. This model clarifies it, you don’t need high IQ to be a recognized/accepted Catcher, but it is one of many requirements in order to be a Setter.
Neurotypicality is a measurable quantity, however complex, and social interactions are a science. It’s intuitive, and can be analyzed empirically, and an individual’s success in studying academic sciences is a good predictor of how much NT they possess because all of these require the same skillset of inquisitive, analytical traits. Building off this logic, being NT is not a skill one magically gains by being Chad.
NT runs alongside looks, the relations between these two factors and the others which form the equation of how an individual fares within a social system is too complicated to be explained in such a simple way like NT is. The common understanding for how they interact still functions well to explain it for now. Chad is at the top NT or not. NT can bring you high but it can’t make you Chad. etc etc.
Experience as a quantity cannot be substituted for NT to determine one’s class, seeing as NT as the measure is largely genetically determined. However it does have many interactions with the NT ability to decide.
Part IV: Questions!
I hope in our conclusion you have thoughts of your own to contribute to this discussion. Some questions which may arise within your mind are:
1. Have you found relatability in reading about the traits of a Catcher or higher tier Catcher? Have you been living in a surrendered state where your ideology was so shaped by defeat that you no longer possess the will to build upon the work of others, or to engage in discussion which challenges you?
2. What might the topics discussed here imply for a strategy purposed towards learning as a Catcher? This model explains a status quo built by modern times. Do you believe people have what it takes to ascend beyond the status quo? Can we achieve a system where new learners are made capable of producing effective change and equal contributions? More simply, how do we as a forum community work with this new model as we continue to understand it further, in order to create a progressive culture where creative thought is commonplace or increased?
Sorry again if you found ts hard to read, I am not exactly an expert in writing scientific analysis so the jargon may be clunky and over the top.
If the interest is enough, the next post will be about connecting theory to application, as in, finding extensions of the model within real life cases and relationships. Otherwise, thank you for reading.
Tags:
@Suigin Trismegistus
@pariah
@Sorcerer's Dream
Last edited:
