I find it difficult to explain my thought processes succinctly. I apologize if this comes across as a mess.
Disclaimer: I have a mental disorder. It affects how I think on a fundamental level, so describing this is as an exercise for me in disseminating it, as much as it is a fun thing to do.
"Everything is numbers" is the best analogy I can think of for this. Everything I see and can conceptualize has a value attached to it--some positive, some negative--and I attempt to discern what the appropriate response is based on that value. If I see a friend, and they say hello, they have a positive value attached, so I'll reply in a friendly manner. If I'm in a conversation and sardonic or sarcastic responses are the norm, I'll attempt to emulate that in my responses--it seems the most used (and thus acceptable by
numeric value rather than social value) response type. If I am part of a work force or social gathering, I spot the most used body language and activities of others, and emulate it to the best of my ability. My objective is to find the most numerically
sound value to wield, rather than the most socially acceptable one. Namely because I have a difficult time discerning appropriate responses otherwise. I can be blind to the emotional needs of others, or the ways others may interpret my body language or words to be in some way provocative or hostile. Therefore, in the place of a failed empathetic complex, I wield logic and reason in its place, and create a personality that can fit the needs of the situation.
I emulate my environment, good or bad, save in the most extreme of circumstances which would violate a core part of my personal ethics.
I often label it the "masquerade", a term I stole from a game when I was younger: Who I am is largely based on whatever numeric values I see being most promoted as ideal by the community around me. I'm a very different person in certain circumstances. I can be loud or silent, egotistical or filled with humility, loving and caring or vitriolic and spiteful. Examine my posts here in GD to those of my RP's--in GD I'll happily, and sometimes even viciously, tear into the arguments of others. Whether GD wants to admit it or not, it's a very popular thing to do, and it often gets showered in upvotes if it's done well--even if it involves going after someone's personal character, rather than their arguments. I once called someone a pseudo-Nazi and the community
loved me for it, in all their hypocritical righteousness. In my RP's, I take a stance of diplomacy, look for the compromises, and soft ball any criticisms I have--I constantly encourage my players, even the ones that struggle. When I have to remove a player, unless they've been harassing and attacking people OOCly, I'm very polite in letting them go. Look at my RP Guides--I
never go on the offensive or rant about people in those, they're purely built to be as positive as they can be. Why? Because numerically,
irrelevant of the morals, which by happenstance support this as the right thing to do, this is the best way to gain and keep productive players, or write guides that evade vitriolic criticism, even on sensitive topics.
If you were to take a trip in my mind, you would see a never-ending machination of images, sounds, concepts, and emotions, being interpreted by numbers whose ultimate meaning is arbitrated to set, core values, mixed with my interpretation of the most popular social stances. Save for those closest to me and my most important personal ethics, every thought of others involves, at some level, the constant refinement and changing of my masquerade to suit the needs of that particular social order.
Constantly I seek to be a "good person", but the trouble with it, is that goodness is rarely ever wanted. Good people are, in fact, most often accosted or mocked--especially the ones willing to share their personal thoughts on subjects, whose personal thoughts happen to be unpopular. Therefore the needs of the masquerade sometimes conflict with my inner, typically noble desires. This is especially true of topics where those that I observe take their emotions--their "feelings"--as being of equal or even superior merit to that of cold, hard facts. In fact, most often, presenting cold, hard facts, results in someone clinging more tightly to their emotions--rather than accepting personal faults. Black and white world views are prevalent, and contrast to the ordinarily grey and ever changing numeric values I keep underneath the more sociable masquerade. Put me in a room full of Christians, for instance, and all I will have is an endless assortment of questions, commentary on their book, or silence:
I don't have the capacity to wield faith, it's an emotions-driven response I will never understand in any manner other than basic comprehension. I can understand the definition of an emotion, I can emulate an emotion, but often times I don't feel it underneath the calculated facial expressions and bodily language changes.
That being said, I have close friends who are Christians. My lack of understanding doesn't prevent relationships from forming, but it does prevent me from ever comprehending certain facets of their mind, certain responses they have to situations around them. (Also, I only used Christians as an example--don't worry Christians, you aren't the only faith-based group that I lack the ability to understand at any level. Take it as a compliment: There's something about you I fail to understand, because I literally, cannot physically comprehend it.)
All of this being said, you can compare my mind to that of someone on the outside viewing in: The methods by which humans do emotions sometimes eludes me. The positions that humans take based solely on emotions
definitely eludes me. My every statement is calculated, my every word, measured. Sometimes I critically fail to interpret a situation properly and I will give an incorrect response as a result. Sometimes I fail to read what emotions others might interpret from what I've written properly and cause offense--then, my typical response is confusion, rather than something productive. Absolutely everything has a numeric value attached, and these numeric values are compared, contrasted, and decisions are made based almost solely on "which number is bigger" rather than some abstract social or emotional concept.
Oh, and I suppose I should mention it now to clear things up:
I still feel emotions. Intense emotions, in fact. I just typically fail to feel anything at the emotions of others, which causes me to come across as cold and even malevolent. Therefore, I wield a masquerade--for the benefit of those around me. It makes them feel better to see me smile and laugh along with them, even if my default response would likely be an empty stare, or a grunt of acknowledgement.
So, I suppose someone looking into my inner mind would... To put it metaphorically, since I'm a storyteller after all... Find a small child. He would be confused, injured, and alone, trying to view a world of myriad, wild, unpredictable, and even terrifying colours. The colours often don't
mean anything until that small child attaches a meaning to them--and that meaning is always arbitrary, based on how he sees other children reacting to those same colours. He's always changing faces, not to be deceitful, but so others will stop being scared of him, or might even like him. He's always striving to improve those masquerades--he paints them, he fills in chips or cracks--he does this for hours at a time. Because underneath that masquerade is a dead face, with a pair of colour blind eyes. This child is often confused when he sees others blaming the colours for their woes, when the colours are incorporeal. Yet when he tries to explain why he doesn't feel the same, he becomes beset at all sides by those he was trying his very best to understand, screeching and screaming about their colours, and how he somehow triggered the negative ones.
The child never meant to offend, it wasn't his fault that nature birthed him without the ability to see in colour. Nonetheless he keeps trying anyway, and attempts forevermore to refine a perfect masquerade, so the other children will stop yelling at him when he fails to understand what the formless, baseless colours mean.
This child thinks that becoming vitriolic over the death of a fucking lion and stalking out the perpetrator's family to harass them and try to ruin their lives by association are a pack of vagabonds and hypocrites. They are blinded by the light of their own colours, egos brimming with such self-righteousness as to destroy the very things they hope to preserve. That very same child realizes he sometimes fails and is filled with self-righteousness too.
