Ancient autists

Post Reply New Topic

French thought was highly influential around Bentham's time.

It was the "court language" for many nation-states at that time--including Russia.

It was a "lingua franca" for people who wanted to think of themselves as "cultivated"--similar to the status of Latin during the Renaissance.

Makes sense, there's that French way of seeing society as a machine feel to some Benthamy things I can think of - not that I know much. Bentham gets a big mention when looking at Social Policy in the 19 c - workhouses, cops, sewers and so forth. Utilitarianism to use a big word.

John Stuart Mill was big into Utilitarianism, too.

Many of the French philosophers seemed, ironically, to have veered away from that sort of thinking as the 19th Century progressed--into a more, perhaps, "aesthetic" way of thought (i.e., about ethics, art, breaking social boundaries, etc).

The people that were into Utilitarianism were probably more "Aspie" than those who had more "aesthetic" proclivities.

Thinking more of aspects of French society that show regulation, every kid of a certain year in every school in France being on the same page of the same lesson on the same day is an example. The top down implementation of a blueprint on society, which is what the Benthhamites tried to do in Britain.

Point of order: while Aristophanes portrayed Socrates as a teacher, both Plato and Xenophon portrayed him as explicitly denying being a teacher. So Socrates may not have agreed that his associates were his students.

I think it's fair to say that Socrates saw humanity as his special interest; he says as much in Xenophon's Symposium, by way of explaining his reasoning for marrying Xanthippe, who was a most disagreeable person. Socrates compares his marriage, as a means of coming to understand how to deal with humanity, to a man who would learn to ride horses by choosing the most difficult horse he can find; reasoning that if he can learn to break that horse, he would be able to break any horse.

I'm seeing indications of restricted interests interfering with an ability to maintain normal relationships. (Note also that Socrates appears not to have been a good father to his sons, whom he seems not to have cared all that much about.)

Given how enormously important writing is for a philosopher, one could argue that Socrates' opposition to writing constitutes a communication deficit.

Whether or not he was specifically autistic is a question where reasonable people can disagree, but I'm fairly certain Socrates was not neurotypical.

There's no question that Socrates was not a typical Athenian "man-in-the-street." He had what, today, would be called a "philosophical bent." He had an eccentric way of being. He was probably an odd NT--or perhaps someone on the cusp of the Spectrum.

Point of order: I enjoyed watching the hearings which destroyed Joseph McCarthy in 1954.

Emperor Claudius. Historian and the last one to know and speak etruscan, author of about twenty books (rolls) on etruscan culture (very dry and pedantic style) Unfortunately they went up in flames, when tha library of Alexandria burned down in the 300s.
Claudius is described as very intelligent and a democrat. He was nervous, easily starteled, easily confused, paranoid (who wouldn´t be in his time?) and a sucker for detail and thoroughness.
He was a stammerer, had poor balance and weak legs. Some have suggested that he suffered from cerebral parese due to a difficult birth.
The over all description of his personality and behavior looks very much like ASD.

The people already mentioned may well have been autists, they certainly seemed to display some of the more well-known traits.

However, the problem with this is that the criteria for deciding whether someone is autistic are to a large extent based, - rightly or wrongly - on whether they conform to present-day societal norms. As we all know, autism has only been diagnosed relatively recently, and such norms change over time. For instance, autists tend to have a strong commitment to honesty and authenticity, to integrity, which would have been both normal and highly desirable in the Age of Chivalry or in one of the Medieval Orders of Religious Knights (e.g.: The Knights of St John, etc), whereas in today's corporate culture this makes them stand out as odd, even 'deviant'.

Perhaps the most we can say is that if someone displayed an exceptional ability to think, reason and imagine from a different and perhaps unique viewpoint, then they might be considered autistic.

Good point...Historical context!

But we can also take into account the views expressed by contemporaries. This limits the focus of this kind of historical speculation to famous people, but that does not invalidate it, if such speculation has any validity to begin with.

I found the books of Michael Fitzgerald, much maligned, and looked up several people of particular interest, expecting not to be convinced. To my surprise, one of the cases was really very compelling and I know the traits used by Fitzgerald to make his retrospective diagnosis run through the family, the other case was a bit less compelling,

In the same way, I saw discussions about Einstein and Newton and thought Newton a better fit, his contemporaries certainly found his behavior odd enough that they kept notes about it that survive to the present and reveal many details consistent with autism.

It's fun to speculate--I speculate constantly--and I rely on my speculations to formulate some of my opinions (like we all do, many denials notwithstanding!))

Retrospective diagnosis, to me, does not carry the weight of an "official" diagnosis.

My psychologist told me Leonardo da Vinci was likely autistic, based on his recorded behaviour.

I think this is a bit of a caricature of utilitarianism. Mill in particular was very keen to emphasise the utilitarian benefits of the high arts. And of course, both men were extremely concerned with ethics (Utilitarianism is an ethical theory, after all) and breaking social boundaries (Bentham advocated for the rights of the poor and animals, Mill wrote extensively on the suffering of women).

I never said Utilitarians weren't into ethics or the "high arts." I meant that the philosophical thought of France veered away at least somewhat from Utilitarian methodology in determining an "ideal state of being." The same thing happened in England via the Romantic literary movement.

I have lots of affection for Utilitarianism myself. For the most part, my thought patterns veers towards the Utilitarian and the Empirical.

I think you're thinking of Archimedes...

Of bathtube fame.