20 Jul 2014, 5:32 pm
First, I don't believe in diagnosing the dead. Some, like this irish guy, claiming famous scientists and Hitler and serial killers had ASD isn't useful for anyone.
Second, diagnosis or not, universities are filled with aspies and near aspies. Going through university with ASD can't be that uncommon. Getting a doctorate and working at a university, teaching and publishing research, also is very possible. These people wouldn't be famous outside their field, not many scientists are... They do as much to advance our species as anyone famous, people aren't really famous for science anymore. People are famous for doing weird stuff on TV now. 
21 Jul 2014, 11:22 am
Aspertastic424 wrote:
Hey there, I am just looking for your opinions on the whole "historic geniuses with autism" theory, you know like Beethoven, Einstein, Charles Darwin, JFK ( lol kidding) etc.
I keep hearing about historic autistic geniuses, and part of me believes it, but part of me really does not. Just look at ( only high functioning) autistics today. Even those with HFA and Aspergers syndrome, many have a very tough time just functioning in the world ( holding down a job, graduating from school, living independently etc) let alone finding a cure for cancer or bring about world peace. It apparently is considered remarkable for a person with any form autism to graduate successfully from college or hold down a long term job ( happy to say I have done both!
)
At the time when many of these geniuses lived, schools offered no form of accomdation for anyone, and verbal/physical abuse by teachers to students was common and considered normal by society. How could people with autism have even survived that environment, never mind become intellectual greats?
I keep hearing about historic autistic geniuses, and part of me believes it, but part of me really does not. Just look at ( only high functioning) autistics today. Even those with HFA and Aspergers syndrome, many have a very tough time just functioning in the world ( holding down a job, graduating from school, living independently etc) let alone finding a cure for cancer or bring about world peace. It apparently is considered remarkable for a person with any form autism to graduate successfully from college or hold down a long term job ( happy to say I have done both!
)At the time when many of these geniuses lived, schools offered no form of accomdation for anyone, and verbal/physical abuse by teachers to students was common and considered normal by society. How could people with autism have even survived that environment, never mind become intellectual greats?
I imagine that a person with special interests and impairment in social relationships (enough for a diagnosis of AS by the old criteria), but without sensory problems, difficulty with transitions, etc. could succed in schools without special accomodations, specially if their special interest is in an academic area (I am not diagnosed but have many aspie traits, and !never lost a year in school, usually with good grades - the problem was to find a job after!).
21 Jul 2014, 11:40 am
Aspertastic424 wrote:
Hey there, I am just looking for your opinions on the whole "historic geniuses with autism" theory, you know like Beethoven, Einstein, Charles Darwin, JFK ( lol kidding) etc.
It all depends on how narrow or wide you define autistic and genius. Some definitions of genius require a broad form of autism as a systemized and obsessive nature are require to be a true genius, other definitions of genius mean its impossible to be autistic(impaired) and most functional(genius)
I keep hearing about historic autistic geniuses, and part of me believes it, but part of me really does not. Just look at ( only high functioning) autistics today. Even those with HFA and Aspergers syndrome, many have a very tough time just functioning in the world ( holding down a job, graduating from school, living independently etc)
This is kinda the point, many of these genius still had these troubles, and this is the value in recognising autistic intelligence. Were not more or less intelligent than anyone else. What we represent in the concept of broader intelligence, having a numerical definition or a status based definition of intelligence is counterproductive. Everyone is intelligent, we just happen to have far more diverse forms of intelligences than the masses.
let alone finding a cure for cancer or bring about world peace. It apparently is considered remarkable for a person with any form autism to graduate successfully from college or hold down a long term job ( happy to say I have done both!)
[b]Again having a strictly materialistic and status based definition of achievement of
At the time when many of these geniuses lived, schools offered no form of accomdation for anyone, and verbal/physical abuse by teachers to students was common and considered normal by society. How could people with autism have even survived that environment, never mind become intellectual greats?
Furthermore given the many problems that people with autism suffer from today, even if you made an allowance that a lot of those geniuses were autism, you would have to look at the other side of that coin. For every "genius" there were probably 10 aspies who just couldn't make it at life, and became beggars, vagrants, or jesters in the kings court ( many jesters in midieval times probably had an intellectual disability
)
Einstein is the most famous example of a historical aspie. But he seemed to have a wide circle of friends ( including quite a few mistresses, including a ballerina 8.) This does not sound like a man who had trouble relating to other people.
Im sorry if I have offended some people here, but I honestly would like to hear what you think of my ideas, and maybe you can convince me otherwise? Ultimately I think it is fairly unimportant what "disability" these figures may or may not have had, its more their contributions and interesting intellect that I think is ultimately worth the discussion. Any thoughts?
It all depends on how narrow or wide you define autistic and genius. Some definitions of genius require a broad form of autism as a systemized and obsessive nature are require to be a true genius, other definitions of genius mean its impossible to be autistic(impaired) and most functional(genius)
I keep hearing about historic autistic geniuses, and part of me believes it, but part of me really does not. Just look at ( only high functioning) autistics today. Even those with HFA and Aspergers syndrome, many have a very tough time just functioning in the world ( holding down a job, graduating from school, living independently etc)
This is kinda the point, many of these genius still had these troubles, and this is the value in recognising autistic intelligence. Were not more or less intelligent than anyone else. What we represent in the concept of broader intelligence, having a numerical definition or a status based definition of intelligence is counterproductive. Everyone is intelligent, we just happen to have far more diverse forms of intelligences than the masses.
let alone finding a cure for cancer or bring about world peace. It apparently is considered remarkable for a person with any form autism to graduate successfully from college or hold down a long term job ( happy to say I have done both!
)[b]Again having a strictly materialistic and status based definition of achievement of
At the time when many of these geniuses lived, schools offered no form of accomdation for anyone, and verbal/physical abuse by teachers to students was common and considered normal by society. How could people with autism have even survived that environment, never mind become intellectual greats?
Furthermore given the many problems that people with autism suffer from today, even if you made an allowance that a lot of those geniuses were autism, you would have to look at the other side of that coin. For every "genius" there were probably 10 aspies who just couldn't make it at life, and became beggars, vagrants, or jesters in the kings court ( many jesters in midieval times probably had an intellectual disability
)Einstein is the most famous example of a historical aspie. But he seemed to have a wide circle of friends ( including quite a few mistresses, including a ballerina 8.) This does not sound like a man who had trouble relating to other people.
Im sorry if I have offended some people here, but I honestly would like to hear what you think of my ideas, and maybe you can convince me otherwise? Ultimately I think it is fairly unimportant what "disability" these figures may or may not have had, its more their contributions and interesting intellect that I think is ultimately worth the discussion. Any thoughts?
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Autistic families and autistic individuals in NT families |
15 Jun 2025, 10:02 pm |
| The Autistic Self |
19 Jun 2025, 8:03 pm |
| Sometimes I Hate Being Autistic. |
25 May 2025, 9:08 pm |
| Handling rejection for being autistic. |
20 Apr 2025, 8:18 am |
