Simon Baron Cohen Journal Article on Neurodiversity

Post Reply New Topic

Editorial Perspective: Neurodiversity – a revolutionary concept for autism and psychiatry

Article argues that brain differences in autism is not a disorder unlike co morbids such as epilepsy

The link didn't work - took me to a page that said "forbidden, you don't have access"

The link didn't work - took me to a page that said "forbidden, you don't have access"

I was able to read it online via Google though. Goodness me, SBC is finally saying things that I agree with, who would have thought! I wonder is he has discovered new insights into himself.


Excerpt:
There are several messages from the concept of neurodiversity. First, there is no single way for a brain to be normal, as there are many ways for the brain to be wired up and reach adulthood. Second, we need more ethical, nonstigmatising language and concepts for thinking about people who are different and/or who have disabilities. Third, we need a framework that does not pathologise and focus disproportionately on what the person struggles with, and instead takes a more balanced view, to give equal attention to what the person can do. And finally, genetic or other kinds of biological variation are intrinsic to the person's identity, their sense of self and personhood, which seen through a human rights lens, should be given equal respect alongside any other form of diversity, such as gender.

It will be important to see how the concept of neurodiversity is applied to the 300 diagnoses currently all called ‘disorders’ in DSM-5, and if it revolutionises both the science and the practice of psychiatry.

Here's the full version of the article
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 12703/full

Thanks for correcting me again.

SBC has been pro neurodiversity movement leaning for years

Is Asperger’s syndrome/High-Functioning Autism necessarily a disability? - 2000

Yes, somewhat erratically. Seventeen years ago he was arguing that Asperger's Syndrome should not be considered as needing diagnosis because it wasn't really a disability, unlike the rest on the spectrum.

Since then, he has written elsewhere that "everyone has a bit of Aspergers".

Coincidence that you posted this thread tonight APOM, I started reading his "Zero Degrees of Empathy" again today, and the position he takes there is somewhat at odds with a neurodiverse acceptance point of view.

(I have wondered whether he has somewhat more than a "bit" of Aspergers for a long time. I seem to be the only person here, though, who wonders that. Just for the sake of argument, let's suppose that he is; the most interesting questions then would be when did he realise, and what was the impact of that realisation on him - quite possibly extreme fear that if he was "unmasked", his work and himself would no longer be treated with respect. To me, sometimes he seems to be wearing his 'I am the objective scientist hat' (he says it too much to be entirely convincing somehow, and then, on the other hand, sometimes he almost seems to be wearing a "in the closet aspie" hat).

In an interview with The New Idealist in 2014, he answered this interesting question in an interesting way:

The New Idealist: In one of your talks you reference a quote from Hans Asperger “for success in science or art, a dash of autism is essential”. So as a scientist yourself, where do you sit on your own AQ scale?

Simon Baron-Cohen: Ah (laugh), though I haven’t taken the test, because I developed it, I sort of know how it works. I’m not naïve to it all. So, I don’t know if it would be very valid for me to take it. But, you know, as a scient— I mean, scientists, as a group, tend to score higher than people who are outside science on the AQ. We’ve used the AQ in our university, for example, and compared the students in humanities to the students in science, and the scientists score just slightly, but significantly, higher than humanities students. It’s all about, you know, that the AQ isn’t diagnostic; it simply counts how many autistic traits people have, and we all have some, and it’s, it’s a bell curve, you know. It’s, it’s a section of the population, and it may only be that if you score very high that you might need a diagnosis."

I wonder..

Perhaps he is now moving into the entertainment business like his cousin Sacha

Though it manifests differently in each of them, they both have that "oddball" quality...

There has always been speculation that Cohen is an aspie, that is probably why he was asked that question.

His 2000 statement about low functioning bieng disabled and Aspies not disabled is ablest to the core, but in 2000 when it was written functioning labels were pretty much universally accepted, the backlash against them had not started.

SBC like so many key figures in the history of autism have done both evil and good. Leo Kanner discovered us then invented the refrigerator mother theory, Bruno Bettlehiem is arguarbly the most damaging person to autistics ever yet his treatments were way more progressive then the ongoing treatments of the time, If not Bettlehiem, Lovass Is the most damaging person to autistics in history, yet he was trying to stop the institutionalization and drugging of autistics. Autistics would be much better off if he was successfull in stopping the drugging of autistics which is much worse now, but now his ABA is a stifiling monopoly. Bernard Rimland had a key role in pushing the refrigerator mother theory out of the mainstream, the Autism Society of America he founded helped bring about mandated public education for the disabled in America, yet he was a supporter of Lovass from the get go and became an early anti vaxx supporter peddling quack therapies.

I attended the same university as Baron-Cohen, and was there at the same time as he was. He was certainly involved in one or two incidents which raised eyebrows.

On one occasion he took legal action to prevent a student magazine from publishing an article about a magazine he was producing. Not sure how many nineteen-year-olds have the means to employ a solicitor, and even more amazingly he hadn't even seen the article, which contained nothing inaccurate or defamatory.

I once met him. He seemed far too self-possessed and confident to be ASD, but I suppose the 'spectrum' is a wide one.

Yes it is. If the spectrum is represented as a Bell Curve, SBC would fit on one tail of it.

There is a great deal of diversity on the spectrum, (just look at Wrong Planet) though that's not really the point of this thread.

I quoted SBC's comment more as a possible example of the way he maybe "muddies the waters" sometimes, as to his own status.

It appears that Simon Baron-Cohen, Ph.D., has finally published a valid response to the brief argument he had on stage with Roy Richard Grinker, Ph.D., at the 2015 IMFAR International Meeting for Autism Research conference about the use of diagnostic descriptors. Both seemed to see a need to steer away from the the current descriptor of "disorder," but with differing reasons. Baron-Cohen had suggested using the term "Autism Spectrum Condition(s)" to avoid the specific stigma of a "disorder," while Grinker suggested the simpler, original term "Autism" to avoid any possible stigma, to which the audience of about 3,000 researchers cheered. It was mentioned that the term "disorder" had become a legalistic term of art in the United States whereby educational, governmental, medical and professional benefits could be enjoyed only if a diagnosis was a disorder. American insurance businesses seemed to support the idea of restricting classified diagnoses to disorders to avoid fanciful subclinical characteristics which aren't diagnoses.

Personally, I support the ideas of both men, with a slight desire to see Grinker's opinion win out. But, Baron-Cohen appears to have threaded the needle artfully in his explanation of terminologies.