Feralucce wrote:
ModusPonens wrote:
1) No, I am not. Are you? Even if you are, you're making a diagnosis without interview. So we're on equal ground here.
I am? Where did I make a diagnosis? I offered other options, never once did I say the character has any of the alternate diagnoses, simply that they fit as well, if not better than asperger's. I think you have either misread my words or mistaken my words for someone else.
ModusPonens wrote:
2) I don't know. I'm not an activist for autism rights any more than I am an activist for a free education, for example. And I'm not arguing because I think it would make us any good. I'm arguing because it's an interesting question.
Fair enough, though I don't remember mentioning activism at all. I was discussing personal impact... wildly different thing. Interesting interpretation of what was stated.
ModusPonens wrote:
3) Just like a chricature drawing makes a person with a big nose have a huge nose, the charicature that is Sheldon makes it obvious that he's an aspie.
obvious: adj - easily seen, recognized, or understood; open to view or knowledge; evident. Considering the poll puts it in the majority of "no" and there are other, as likely explanations for his behavior... NOTHING is obvious.
ModusPonens wrote:
You make a good point, but against yourself. NTs say what they don't mean and Bill Prady is an NT, afaik.
Except that I did not make that point. You have extrapolated from my words and presented something that I did not say. I'm noticing a trend here.
ModusPonens wrote:
You seem to care.
You're right... I did... until I asked that question... And it's not even caring about what is being discussed as much as it is the damn tendency to care only about fact.
1) that's a nice way to not adress my arguments regarding the specific diagnosis. Besides, you said that cyclothimic disorder fit like a glove, so I guess you're just playing with words.
2) You said: "Do you really think that having the arrogant, rude, prick officially or unofficially diagnosed with asperger's syndrome really does
US, the diagnosed any good?" (emphasis mine). So my interpretation was more than plausible.
3) The question in the poll is "Do you think the writers of "The Big Bang Theory" should make an episode where Sheldon gets an aspergers diagnosis?" It's completely different than asking if Sheldon has Asperger's or not. From what I remember no one disagreed with the diagnosis except for you. What people disagred on was if it was a good idea to make an episode in which Sheldon is diagnosed with AS.
I took the inevitable logical consequence of what you said, so even if you didn't say the exact thing I mentioned, what you said implied what I was saying. When you use reductio ad absurdum (I think that's how it's spelled) it's exactly the same principle applied, that is, if you say something and that something implies a 2nd thing, you are afirming the 2nd thing.
At least we are motivated by the same reason. That's a good start.
21 Feb 2013, 9:51 am
