Dictionary definition of Autism.

Post Reply New Topic

1911, dude. Little bit outdated. Epicycles may have their place in the history of astronomy, but nobody's using them now.

I don't see why being reticent to speak should make one necessarily low-functioning. It doesn't follow. Not unless you define "has difficulties with speech" as synonymous with "low-functioning", anyway. Because you can have problems with that, and still be just fine with total independence; or you can have really fluent speech and still need help with daily tasks. There isn't some single continuum you can fit people on, and say "he's at this one point on the functioning scale", because invariably any given autistic is going to be at different points on different scales. You may divide people into clear groups based on the strength of one trait; but none of the other traits will line up according to that same line. This isn't some neat little math problem where you come out with a nice smooth little function that you can graph and show to your prof... it's a matter of each person being a different function that changes with time and has so many variables you'll need more dimensions than the guys studying string theory.

That was just posting of the first instance of the word; Kanner used and modified it later (as did Hans), to distinguish a group of people from those with Schizophrenia (i.e., people who started off with the autistic aloneness, rather than developing it later in life).

Wing pretty much did it, really (the spectrum that is); whilst in her paper she has clinical accounts that differ to Kanner's, one of them showed the prototypical onset of Early-Infantile Autism and later improved (that spectrum thingy). That's where the spectrum comes from; her study on a whole heap of socially disturbed children in a poor area of England.

As of now, it goes from "in a world of his own" to "doesn't know how to relate to people, but tries to anyway". As for labels, the former nearly always have Autism, whereas the latter have Asperger's.

Here's a nice page which will explain it through the ages.

O, and I'll add the latest part (to contrast with the 1911 definition):

Um, really, it's not that simple. Not all Aspies are outgoing, or want to relate to people. I could care less about interacting with people, other than the facts in their heads; but I've got fluent use of speech. And my mom's told me about a non-verbal autie kid she's worked with, who desperately wants to interact with other people, and doesn't really know how. You may divide the spectrum into "wants to relate" and "doesn't want to relate" but you're going to end up with people who have every level of speech skill on both sides of that line. Also... how do you know that your "in his own world" autie isn't just overwhelmed by the world, recharging, and reaching out when he's got the energy to do so? That doesn't mean a lack of desire to interact, nor "aloofness"; just exhaustion.

Look, I understand it's important to differentiate autism from schizophrenia; but we know they're two different things now. It's time to look at autism on its own.

It's actually not desire, rather it's outward appearance. I wouldn't mind being able to answer people back, but I physically can't. It's level of severity.

They already have differentiated it from Schizophrenia, and they're looking at it separately; the page just lists Autism through the ages.