Autism

I am a stranger on the Internet, so please take my input with a grain of salt.

1. A lot can change from the age of six. You may test differently now, if you were to be reevaluated.

2. Good academic performance, especially in standardized test, might demonstrate that you are intelligent, but they do not preclude other deficiencies.

For example, your post is disorganized, riddled with errors, and difficult to parse. You said, "am lazy to edit." This might indicate that you have difficulty communicating clearly, perhaps emerging from hyperactivity or focus issues. Autism often comes with communication issues.

Other people can't see your standardized test scores on your face, but they can judge you immediately by how you communicate. That might explain why people call you "stupid."

I might be completely off the mark. If you do find that communication is a difficult point for you, then the good news is you can practice anytime. Just talking with others, getting older, and building experience will bring you up to speed with diligence.

Finally, there is a negative social stigma to intellectual disability. Try not to buy into it too much. I used to teach 12 year olds how to read. Some people never learn how. They were all intelligent, they just need to step back a few grade levels and have a helping hand. Sometimes you do need to reach out for help.

Short version: It's BS.

Longer version: it's a report from years ago and an IQ test. You should not focus on the IQ. It doesn't matter. The diagnosis, well, it's medical and pathologizing. The criterias for autism in the DSM 4? 5? aren't that good. Nowadays, we understand autism in a complete different way and intelligence isn't part of it. What you will find written in the report is based on the point of view of neurotypical looking at and comparing something different. It's a one way assumption. This isn't the reality. They have to take in account how the autists live and experience the life. This is very different and shows that the criterias aren't as accurate as people thought.

You should not take this assumption about logic in the document too seriously.

This is doing echo to my own experience. I had some difficulties learning part of math and physics. Many teachers and professionals said that I would never get it. I would never do anything in my life. I did a formal IQ test and my score went above scale. But, I still struggled in part of math and physics. Later, I had the chance to empower myself. At this point, I understood why I struggled. I'm self-taught. So, the teachers and other professionals were wrong and the learning system wasn't adapted to my style of learning.

I started over. I respected my own style of learning. I didn't struggle.

What is in a document when you were 6 yo is a statement made looking through a disforming prism. I don't think you should give it too much credit.

The other point like for sudoku, you are using a lot of energy for many other things at your age. This was another issue. I used my energy masking and being with others. I didn't use it to resolve puzzles. (I feel old writing this.)

I would caution your and other people's perception of your intelligence as having significance. Doing well academically (especially pre-college) and thinking that this equals intelligence can be a bit of a trap. I, along with other high functioning friends, also did well academically and many people, teachers, peers, etc all viewed us as intelligent - the problem is, we understood expectations and how to create a mask and personal systems which allowed our brains to succeed in school. Entering college, that all changed for us. The expectations changed and the system changed- everything I created for myself to succeed no longer applied. I went from a 4.0 high school student in all advanced classes to dropping out of college the first semester. I saw peers who did terribly in high school thrive in college. I saw how they easily formed new connections and found support which allowed them to continue where I stumbled.

I would ask yourself what value you are expecting out of being viewed as intelligent and why you feel you might need that label applied to you. Growing up, I personally put a lot of effort into being seen as smart to make up for my ASD thinking I could outsmart it or something. Being 30+ now, I no longer really care how people view me- I just care that they are kind and respectful.

I think you could benefit from focusing less on these medical definitions and more on trying to figure out your own personal needs and boundaries - those are what really matter. I know we need to sometimes surrender to these definitions for the sake of getting support (E: which knowing our needs and boundaries better, informs better), but that it in itself is a form of gatekeeping (not yours, the medical and social institutions), that we shouldn't have to apply to our own thinking of ourselves.

Sorry to info dump, but these are a few links that might help you think about things a little differently:

https://www.drakemusic.org/blog/nim-ralph/understanding-disability-part-6-the-radical-model/

https://www.neurodiverging.com/what-is-internalized-ableism-neurodivergent-people-need-to-know/

https://www.autisticparentsuk.org/post/overcoming-internalised-ableism

https://web.archive.org/web/20230605065733/https://ollibean.com/intelligence-is-an-ableist-concept/

https://disabledfeminists.com/2009/10/23/ableist-word-profile-intelligence/

https://liminalnest.wordpress.com/2018/06/23/intelligence-is-a-myth-on-deconstructing-the-roots-of-cognitive-ableism/

"logic deficits" does not mean ID, and without further information on what they observed of you at age six, i don't think we can draw any conclusions of that. furthermore as many others have commented already, people change, and you are not the same you that you were when you were six. you may have been slower to develop certain skills as a small child, but be good at those same skills now. that's just growing up.

I guess your confusion come from the difference from your expectations (being smart) and what you read (logic deficit)

Peoples around you say you're smart but do they say you're logic?

Intelligence is hard to define but seem more like a spectrum to me: someone could have very good logic but very bad memory for example.

Also it's not because you read it that it's true. What the test exactly mean by "logic deficit"? How you was when you passed it? How old is it? You changed since you're six.

The most important question is: Is it really worrying you, would you actually feel better with a confirmation/disconfirmation?

It's possible that your father observed something unexpected in your behavior or the way you handled a situation at a young age, which prompted him to seek medical advice. However given your own accounts, it seems like whatever concerns he noted might not be affecting you significantly now.

It might have been a passing phase or something you've outgrown, or might have been your father being overly concerned for you and seeing an issue where there was none. Perhaps discussing this with your father or a healthcare professional who has access to your medical history could provide more clarity.

I assume groups may not think you're smart as they notice you don't adapt to them. That's an autism indicator of sorts, and not based on academic intelligence.

I tested as being above-normal on average,

even though I'm below-normal in both writing & arithmetic.

My average-score was above-normal ( since altered by massive concussions ) because what I was good-at I was really good-at, compared with normals.

Having an average that is far above normal, in academics, doesn't mean that all one's capabilities are above normal.

That is a significant difference between the idea, & the ideology, of the "academic superior" mind, vs the actuality of minds being made of SO many dimensions that deficits/defects are normal.

Read Thomas Armstrong's book "Seven Kinds of Smart, revised edition" ( revised is 9 intelligences, but they kept the same title ), and see how social-intelligence was left out from IQ testing because it wasn't a male intelligence ( implied by the quoted evidence ).

It's a book that all parents & teachers, and learning-disabled people, ought read.

Please dig into it, even if it means a trip to your local library.

_ /\ _