In which a group of graying eternal amateurs discuss their passions, interests and obsessions, among them: movies, art, politics, evolutionary biology, taxes, writing, computers, these kids these days, and lousy educations.

E-Mail Donald
Demographer, recovering sociologist, and arts buff

E-Mail Fenster
College administrator and arts buff

E-Mail Francis
Architectural historian and arts buff

E-Mail Friedrich
Entrepreneur and arts buff
E-Mail Michael
Media flunky and arts buff

We assume it's OK to quote emailers by name.

Try Advanced Search

  1. Seattle Squeeze: New Urban Living
  2. Checking In
  3. Ben Aronson's Representational Abstractions
  4. Rock is ... Forever?
  5. We Need the Arts: A Sob Story
  6. Form Following (Commercial) Function
  7. Two Humorous Items from the Financial Crisis
  8. Ken Auster of the Kute Kaptions
  9. What Might Representational Painters Paint?
  10. In The Times ...

Sasha Castel
AC Douglas
Out of Lascaux
The Ambler
Modern Art Notes
Cranky Professor
Mike Snider on Poetry
Silliman on Poetry
Felix Salmon
Polly Frost
Polly and Ray's Forum
Stumbling Tongue
Brian's Culture Blog
Banana Oil
Scourge of Modernism
Visible Darkness
Thomas Hobbs
Blog Lodge
Leibman Theory
Goliard Dream
Third Level Digression
Here Inside
My Stupid Dog
W.J. Duquette

Politics, Education, and Economics Blogs
Andrew Sullivan
The Corner at National Review
Steve Sailer
Joanne Jacobs
Natalie Solent
A Libertarian Parent in the Countryside
Rational Parenting
Colby Cosh
View from the Right
Pejman Pundit
God of the Machine
One Good Turn
Liberty Log
Daily Pundit
Catallaxy Files
Greatest Jeneration
Glenn Frazier
Jane Galt
Jim Miller
Limbic Nutrition
Innocents Abroad
Chicago Boyz
James Lileks
Cybrarian at Large
Hello Bloggy!
Setting the World to Rights
Travelling Shoes

Redwood Dragon
The Invisible Hand
Daze Reader
Lynn Sislo
The Fat Guy
Jon Walz


Our Last 50 Referrers

« Inside the Beltway Humor | Main | Elsewhere »

August 07, 2007

What's Your A.Q. (Aspie Quotient)?

Michael Blowhard writes:

Dear Blowhards --

Don't ask me why, but I can never pass up a "How Aspie are you?" quiz. I scored a very low 11 on this one. I evidently don't have much of a future before me as an Aspie -- my love of parties dooms that ambition every time.



UPDATE: Steve Sailer has put up some interesting postings about nerds and nerdishness: here and here.

posted by Michael at August 7, 2007


23. Sounds about right.

Posted by: the patriarch on August 7, 2007 3:16 PM

14.Even when cheated: 18.
Disgustingly normal.

Posted by: Tatyana on August 7, 2007 3:22 PM

12 here.

Posted by: Charlton Griffin on August 7, 2007 3:40 PM

I got a 22. Must be because I used to design and program software systems.

Posted by: Donald Pittenger on August 7, 2007 4:00 PM

An embarrassing 29. Don't ask--guess I don't like people so I'm likely not to answer anyway.

Posted by: susan on August 7, 2007 4:05 PM

I got a 25. But since I have no interest in other people, it doesn't bother me...except that I didn't outscore Susan. Bummer.

Posted by: Friedrich von Blowhard on August 7, 2007 4:48 PM

I beat you Susan, I got a 32. Though I don't care for numbers, dates or categories, etc, and I never lined stuff up when I was a kid. I'm really just a basic introvert. I find people tiring though I actually do like them. Do we really need a new label for that?

Posted by: Todd Fletcher on August 7, 2007 4:55 PM

I got a 26 or so (can't remember exactly -- is that another symptom?): it said "average math contest winner." But then when I was kid I took an aptitude test that recommended that I seek a job as a lighthouse keeper. So maybe I'm making progress. Slow but sure!

Posted by: Lester Hunt on August 7, 2007 4:58 PM

11, yo.

Posted by: Searchie on August 7, 2007 5:00 PM

32. Right in the Aspie range.

Do I get a donut???

Posted by: Adriana on August 7, 2007 5:42 PM

Mine's rather high for a female. I'm at 19, the level of "average male scientist" or "female physicist". Without cheating.

Some of the questions seem as likely to pinpoint shyness as Asperger tendencies. I don't think the two are the same thing, either, in case anyone wants to bring up that possibility. People can be shy for many reasons, not all of which involve a dislike for other people, for interactive conversation, or for human emotionalism.

Posted by: alias clio on August 7, 2007 6:49 PM

41 -- is there a prize?

Posted by: Dr. Weevil on August 7, 2007 7:22 PM

18 - not even quite to the level of the average scientist. . .

Posted by: Derek Lowe on August 7, 2007 8:11 PM

22. Which seems right, because I am *both* very social *and* love, adore, revel in numbers. In fact, I like parties where people discuss numbers.

Posted by: Francis Morrone on August 7, 2007 8:44 PM

13. I wonder if I'm one of those males that Simon Baron-Cohen says have female brains. A psychic did once tell me I have "very strong female energies". Which must be true, I guess, if I'm listening to a psychic.

Posted by: PatrickH on August 7, 2007 9:35 PM

I like Adriana's question. It defuses the tension for us Aspies. ;^)

Posted by: ricpic on August 7, 2007 10:08 PM


I am more of an Aspie than Michael Blowhard?

Posted by: communicatrix on August 7, 2007 11:26 PM

27 here. Higher than I'd like.

Posted by: Peter on August 7, 2007 11:33 PM

13--I thought I was way more Aspie than that.

Posted by: BP on August 8, 2007 12:06 AM

18- right down the middle.

Posted by: Thursday on August 8, 2007 12:41 AM

Description says 21 equates to "average male or female computer scientist"
Can't be right. Still haven't figured out why my printer interface hasn't worked for the past 3 weeks.
Oh, yeah! It's because I'm still albatrossed with a PC. Wonder how a score of 21 and being a Mac person would match?

And what about that one question, "Do you enjoy social chitchat?"
Come on! Is there someone out there that actually answered with "I absolutely agree"? O.K., I'll repair to my cave now.

Posted by: DarkoV on August 8, 2007 7:54 AM

Lucky 13 here.

Posted by: yahmdallah on August 8, 2007 10:47 AM

Darko, you could raise you brow on almost every question in that test, is what I'm saying. Bigger question is "how many extra points will be served to a person who takes this test seriously?"

Posted by: Tatyana on August 8, 2007 10:52 AM

I scored a 26, but I agree with Todd that introversion more than latent Asperger's is the cause. Compared to some others in my field (astrophysics), I'm freakin therapist material!

Posted by: CyndiF on August 8, 2007 11:02 AM

Hey, I actually love a lot of social chitchat! Let's not diss the chitchat!

Posted by: MIchael Blowhard on August 8, 2007 11:23 AM

Seriously, here.
This whole thing about Social Chit Chat is quite a mania for me. Aside from trekking down to Australia for a chit on the barby chat, I am of the School of Speech that believes that the practioner of excellent SCC is, as a true salesman, born, not made. So, I am in awe of your SCC talents.

SCC is one thing but SCC and intelligence? Well, answer me this; Why aren't you ruling the world? To be able to roll out relative inanities while simultaneously rolling Big Ideas in one's head is quite a juggling act. When one has to concentrate on one's SCC (as I do, for fear of strewing verbal bombs indiscriminately), one is incapable of also pondering complicated ideas at the same time.

So, my point was not intended to be of the "dissing" variety but rather one of the "wondering" variety, as I haven't been exposed to anyone who truly enjoys themselves when engaged in SCC

Posted by: DarkoV on August 8, 2007 11:43 AM

14 and breathing a sigh of relief.

Posted by: Chris White on August 8, 2007 12:46 PM

Whenever I take one of those quizzes I always end up way over on the "gak, you pathologically systemizing android (fembot?) inhuman freak, you" end of the scale. But really, I'm a nice, perfectly normal, unassuming, highly verbal regular gal. The fact that all the clothes in my closet have to be punctiliously arranged by color in correct EM-spectrum order, and my spices shelved according to a complex alphabetizing/region of origin system, or that I get swivel-eyed if subjected to Social Chit Chat for a protracted period...doesn't mean a thing, people. Really, these quizzes are very silly.

Posted by: Moira Breen on August 8, 2007 1:47 PM

Yeah. I scored superhigh, but am quite a nice friendly person in real life, I think. Even if you really are born with a brain that is inherently extremely stupid at some things, it's perfectly possible to learn the skills that enable you to manage.

Something interesting about the Asperger's movement of antisocial people banding together in a social group, isn't there :)

Posted by: Alice Bachini on August 8, 2007 6:19 PM

Actually this is just a test comment to make sure that Michael hasn't used this as a ruse to gather us in a group and ban the high scorers from comment capabilities.

But no, he wouldn't do that, being an openminded and gregarious human being.

Posted by: susan on August 8, 2007 8:57 PM

OK, small sample size and all that, but there are a really high number of females commenting here on their high scores. And males out number females 10 to 1 for Aspergers.

So, what's the deal Michael? What makes you such an Aspie-chick magnet?

Posted by: Todd Fletcher on August 9, 2007 11:07 AM

I'm 15, a female biologist. Amusing, since I almost puked over seeing a fetal pig in actual biology in highschool. The funniest question on the test to me was "I find it difficult when talking on the telephone to know when it's my turn to speak." Well, c'mon, if the other person would just shut up. Tee hee.

Posted by: annette on August 10, 2007 1:28 PM

Wonder why Mencius didn't take the test...maybe was a charity gesture on his part. The scale would break.

Posted by: Tatyana on August 10, 2007 4:52 PM

Post a comment

Email Address:



Remember your info?