We analyze the patterns of autistic reasoning while performing planning tasks. The formalism of nonmonotonic logic of defaults is used to simulate the autistic decision-making while adjusting an action to a context. Our current main finding is that while people with autism may be able to process single default rules, they have a characteristic difficulty in cases where multiple default rules conflict. Even though default reasoning was intended to simulate the reasoning of typical human subjects, it turns out that following the operational semantics of default reasoning in a literal way leads to the peculiarities of autistic behavior observed in the literature.