20/06/2026
Therapist responds: Common definition error and possible Schrodinger's do*****ag alert.
Unfortunately, this is a problem with the lack of distinction that neurotypical people often have with words. Often, they are far to imprecise in their use of vocabulary.
Neurodivergent people, especially autistic peeps, often develop more complex nuance in their vocabulary, to avoid being misunderstood. Unfortunately, many 'typicals don't comprehend the subtle differences in words that fall in similar categories or are often mixed up, so the attempt to be more nuanced fails, unless you are talking to another person who has learned nuance.
To most neurodivergent peeps, explanation and excuse are quite different in meaning.
- An explanation informs the listener of the process and reasoning for how things got to this, often including a reason for the failure, and sometimes what will be done differently to avoid the same problem.
- There are two types of excuse:
1) Why this failed, and what you'll do about it (useful, cooperative, shows growth)
2) An avoidance of responsibility and or avoidance of cooperative desire (note useful, uncooperative, shows avoidance). This one can be legitimately due to either exhaustion in adversity, or a significant in priority. This is often understood as laziness (sometimes true), and avoidance of reasonable responsibility.
Unfortunately, to most people, especially most neurotypicals, these two words mean the same thing - an excuse for the second reason.
Neurotypicals generally don't want to know the parts of the process, and thus why it actually went wrong, or what you'll do differently next time. They just want it to go right, without understanding what needs to change (especially if you need more resources to do the thing) - this is their phrase of complaint.
That is, when they say "why did you do it this way?", it is probably a rhetorical question, implying you are foolish for the method, not an actual request for more data in an attempt for understanding and offer to be helpful. Their is a strong implication that you should fix the problem, regardless of the realistic likelihood that this can be affected without exploring what went wrong and potentially applying more resources to the solution.
A good method of telling the difference between rhetorical questions and someone being cooperative and helpful is to ask.
Question: "Was that a rhetorical questions?"
- If they think that means you want an argument, politely decline by just shrugging and walking off. You don't need that kind of attitude in your life.
- If they say "rhetorical", respond with "that's a bit mean".
= If they are offended, you don't have to sooth their ego. That's the point of telling them it was mean.
= If they say "it's a joke", then check out our page on Schrodinger's do*****ag.
- If they say "I want to know why" or similar, then attempt to explain the reasoning behind why, but as briefly as you can.
-- If they interrupt your brief explanation and don't seem to want to know why despite their earlier protestation (responding to the "rhetorical" query), then shrug and walk away. Mark them as problematic and be warned for the future with this person. See also our page on bullies.
https://www.jomida.com/schrodingers-do*****ag/
https://www.jomida.com/bullying-the-good-the-bad-the-ugly/
