Page 7 of 8 [ 128 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next


Where do you stand on the issue?
pro-cure, I'm on the spectrum 14%  14%  [ 9 ]
anti-cure, I'm on the spectrum 61%  61%  [ 39 ]
pro-cure, I'm an NT parent of an ASD child 2%  2%  [ 1 ]
anti-cure, I'm a NT parent of an ASD child 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
other 23%  23%  [ 15 ]
Total votes : 64

Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

18 Nov 2011, 5:39 am

aghogday wrote:
You said "the only thing that dictates right or wrong is circumstances, not culture". While I agree circumstances play a part, Culture does definitely impact people's morals and the way they see right and wrong, through commercialization, religion, music, TV, Books, magazines, newspapers, traditions, sports, education, the list could fill pages
And you seem to still believe a common delusion that culture somehow determines right and wrong. No, it only determines what people thinking is right and wrong, whether it is right or wrong is not for people to decide and stick labels on.

aghogday wrote:
It's why it takes a jury of 12 to decide a judgement along with a judge in the legal system and an interview process to eliminate those with personal moral bias.
No, the reason why a jury is used is to provide a judgement based on what normal people would think, and to avoid the perversion of the law by corrupt government. In reality personal moral bias can affect the judgement. You don't have to find weird morals infecting the jury and making them cause execrable decisions in courts in the south USA.

aghogday wrote:
In fact, it has been suggested that some people may be born with the inability to determine right from wrong, because of structural issues in the brain, 1 to 3 percent of the population, that are technically referred to as sociopaths. In these cases circumstances and culture have little bearing on what they see as right or wrong
Untrue. Psychopaths have a link between the centres that deal with processing the pain of others and the pleasure centre. They have also been shown to have a very high level of empathy. They know what they are doing wrong, and it gratifies them. SO to say they have no understanding is false.

aghogday wrote:
I provided statistics before that 80% of identified diagnosed adults with ASD's depend on their parents for support and 90 percent don't maintain regular employment, that doesn't sound like sunshine to me
You also came to the insane assertion that over 1 in 300 children in the USA can't talk, and those are only the ones who are autistic. Your statistics about who can speak and who canh't come from eight year olds only. It is also produced by a statistics creator that is now linked with autism speaks. You seem to then be able to quote dates in a lovely little line showing how this group wasn't related, but we have no outside clarification and the way you run with it seems suspect.



Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

18 Nov 2011, 5:43 am

aghogday wrote:
There are all kind of intelligences, and abilities, no one holds them all. I made straight A's in schools, but my dreams were mostly playing team sports, which were well beyond my reach. The fact of the matter is I didn't have the type of intelligence to do the team sports, but I was good at answering questions on a test.
You don't need a whole different intelligence to know how to do team sports. You need to be physically fit and know who's going where and what to do next.



Inventor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,014
Location: New Orleans

18 Nov 2011, 6:55 am

The same stats came up on Work and finding a job. Being Dxed, you get disability payments, so hardly any work. The same, and holding a job, is proof of lack of disability.

It was also brought up that WP has a lot of employed, compared to the stats on disability. aghogday, vermontsavant, pass my autism test, both are or were employed. I was because I was pre disability.

Since 1994, a Dx comes with disability money. So we are talking of different times, and those who found a use for their mental ability, such as IT.

90% of those collecting disability money are not working is closer to the truth, but a look at WP, many working are autistic. It is all about finding a place in life.

So who has the most problem? Those with a Dx, know what the deal is, and have an income, or those who are in school, working, who have problems? WP is popular because it informs the edge, those who may have never been considered autistic, like most girls until very recently, or guys who just did what everyone did, but got lesser results.

There is also a constant stream of over fifty coming in saying, Finally my life makes sense. They all worked. Some did quite well, the focus, learning, can pay off, but the disconnect is always there.

The Social Services meaning of disabled is narrow. It leaves nothing for the same people who by effort and income did not become economically disabled. They are just as autistic, have as many problems, have learned adaptive ways, which should be studied. Wrong Planet is full of them because there is no where else.

Back in the early days we noticed WP was half female. I joked it was because nerds were so studly and attractive. All the girls wanted to talk about was autism, and they were very good at it. All the Great Science of the time, that stuff ages faster than computers, said five boys for every girl.

I credit WP with changing that view, we now think half and half.

If Psychology means rubber stamping forms for State Disability payments, which is what they do, 90% do not work. If you are dealing with the problems of autistic people, more than half are in school, working, and hanging out on WP.

They all seem the same to me.

Just seeing girls as autistic almost doubled the epidemic. Without that fact, it seems the country will be all autistic in fifty years. Girls that work, boys that work, we could double this again.

Lies, damn lies, and Statistics.



MONKEY
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jan 2009
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,896
Location: Stoke, England (sometimes :P)

18 Nov 2011, 9:57 am

I voted other. A cure or treatment (though I don't think an actual cure will ever exist) administered during growth in the womb or early in life could improve the quality of life of their future selve. But that wouuld be very risky as first there needs to be an exact way of determining whether or not the developing child has the brain structure or genetics of an autistic. I don't think this will be possible because people get stuff wrong all the time, I was supposed to have spina bifida before I was born and I turned out completely healthy.

If there ever was a cure on the other hand, I don't think it should be given to anyone over the age of 3 because it will be a very big change to become accustomed to, anyone who's brain structure that changes over night will have quite an upheaval and may need to learn to do everything again. But short term treatments, such as an autism symptom version of paracetamol or something would be ideal for an older child or adult, especiallty those that are severe.


_________________
What film do atheists watch on Christmas?
Coincidence on 34th street.


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,397

18 Nov 2011, 3:34 pm

Gedrene wrote:
aghogday wrote:
There are all kind of intelligences, and abilities, no one holds them all. I made straight A's in schools, but my dreams were mostly playing team sports, which were well beyond my reach. The fact of the matter is I didn't have the type of intelligence to do the team sports, but I was good at answering questions on a test.
You don't need a whole different intelligence to know how to do team sports. You need to be physically fit and know who's going where and what to do next.


Being physically fit does not guarantee one the ability to play team sports. The same issues with the cerebellum that have been identified with Aspergers impact the ability of motor control that allows one to be profecient in playing team sports. I was in the top 10 percent of physical fitness with military standards, could play racquetball well, but did not have the inherent abilities required for team sports or for penmanship.



Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

18 Nov 2011, 4:29 pm

aghogday wrote:
Gedrene wrote:
aghogday wrote:
There are all kind of intelligences, and abilities, no one holds them all. I made straight A's in schools, but my dreams were mostly playing team sports, which were well beyond my reach. The fact of the matter is I didn't have the type of intelligence to do the team sports, but I was good at answering questions on a test.
You don't need a whole different intelligence to know how to do team sports. You need to be physically fit and know who's going where and what to do next.


Being physically fit does not guarantee one the ability to play team sports.

*facepalm*
aghogday wrote:
and know who's going where and what to do next

I said that. Don't ignore what I say.

aghogday wrote:
The same issues with the cerebellum that have been identified with Aspergers impact the ability of motor control that allows one to be profecient in playing team sports. I was in the top 10 percent of physical fitness with military standards, could play racquetball well, but did not have the inherent abilities required for team sports or for penmanship.
Ah, sending us on a merry game are we?
For starters motor skills have nothing to do with being good at racquetball but not team sports. They have everything to do with general physical ability, so to claim that you were good at Racquetball yet not good at team sports because of motor skills is nonsensical because for motor skills to be implicated you must be bad at both. Furthermore the whole idea of referring to team sports just simply sounds like an attempt to fudge in an intellectual stereotype that anything involving teams we are instantly worse at, and it is transparent given the justification is an inconsistent reference to motor skills, another stereotype.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,397

18 Nov 2011, 6:51 pm

Gedrene wrote:
aghogday wrote:
Gedrene wrote:
aghogday wrote:
There are all kind of intelligences, and abilities, no one holds them all. I made straight A's in schools, but my dreams were mostly playing team sports, which were well beyond my reach. The fact of the matter is I didn't have the type of intelligence to do the team sports, but I was good at answering questions on a test.
You don't need a whole different intelligence to know how to do team sports. You need to be physically fit and know who's going where and what to do next.


Being physically fit does not guarantee one the ability to play team sports.

*facepalm*
aghogday wrote:
and know who's going where and what to do next

I said that. Don't ignore what I say.

aghogday wrote:
The same issues with the cerebellum that have been identified with Aspergers impact the ability of motor control that allows one to be profecient in playing team sports. I was in the top 10 percent of physical fitness with military standards, could play racquetball well, but did not have the inherent abilities required for team sports or for penmanship.
Ah, sending us on a merry game are we?
For starters motor skills have nothing to do with being good at racquetball but not team sports. They have everything to do with general physical ability, so to claim that you were good at Racquetball yet not good at team sports because of motor skills is nonsensical because for motor skills to be implicated you must be bad at both. Furthermore the whole idea of referring to team sports just simply sounds like an attempt to fudge in an intellectual stereotype that anything involving teams we are instantly worse at, and it is transparent given the justification is an inconsistent reference to motor skills, another stereotype.


The motor skills required to play racquetball and the motor skills required to go out for a pass on a football field, or dribble a basketball in running are different.

Holding a racquet and the hand eye coordination required to hit a ball is not the same type of motor coordination required to dribble a basketball and remain coordinated doing this while running; same for going out for a football pass.

This is not specifically related to knowing where to go and what to do next. If one did not have those skills they wouldn't be able to drive a car. Not all people with Autism have problems with motor coordination, although researchers estimate that anywhere from 50 to 90 percent do have problems with motor coordination.

Fine motor skills is also an issue, but with enough practice one can over come these issues to a degree.



Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

18 Nov 2011, 7:07 pm

aghogday wrote:
The motor skills required to play racquetball and the motor skills required to go out for a pass on a football field, or dribble a basketball in running are different.
Don't try and sneak around this. You were talking about intelligence, not motor skills:
aghogday wrote:
The fact of the matter is I didn't have the type of intelligence to do the team sports, but I was good at answering questions on a test.



So now you are simply trying to change your tack.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,397

18 Nov 2011, 8:03 pm

Gedrene wrote:
aghogday wrote:
The motor skills required to play racquetball and the motor skills required to go out for a pass on a football field, or dribble a basketball in running are different.
Don't try and sneak around this. You were talking about intelligence, not motor skills:
aghogday wrote:
The fact of the matter is I didn't have the type of intelligence to do the team sports, but I was good at answering questions on a test.



So now you are simply trying to change your tack.


Not all intelligence is measured with an IQ test. Motor skills and coordination fall under Kinesthetic Intelligence:

Quote:
Kinesthetic Intelligence And Our Brain

The area of kinesthetic intelligence is located in the cerebellum and concerns the thalamus, main ganglions and others parts of the brain. The brain’s motor cortex controls bodily motion and people with this intelligence display dexterity and skills for fine motor movement.


http://www.dirjournal.com/guides/understanding-kinesthetic-intelligence/

They don't call it Physcial education for no reason.

Motor skills and coordination can be improved through physical education and some individuals have a higher level of kinesthetic intelligence than others.

The Cerebellum that contols this type of intelligence has been researched as different in some individuals diagnosed with Aspergers, which provides a potential physiological explanation for the differences in Kinesthetic intelligence that has been observed and measured in individuals with ASD's.



Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

19 Nov 2011, 5:06 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_multiple_intelligences#Critical_reception

Wikipedia wrote:
A number of articles have surveyed the use of Gardner's ideas and conclude that there is little to no academically substantiated evidence that his ideas work in practice. Steven A. Stahl found that most of the previous studies which claimed to show positive results had major flaws:
Among others, Marie Carbo claims that her learning styles work is based on research. {I discuss Carbo because she publishes extensively on her model and is very prominent in the workshop circuit...} But given the overwhelmingly negative findings in the published research, I wondered what she was citing, and about a decade ago, I thought it would be interesting to take a look. Reviewing her articles, I found that out of 17 studies she had cited, only one was published. Fifteen were doctoral dissertations and 13 of these came out of one university—St. John’s University in New York, Carbo’s alma mater. None of these had been in a peer-refereed journal. When I looked closely at the dissertations and other materials, I found that 13 of the 17 studies that supposedly support her claim had to do with learning styles based on something other than modality.


You are advocating pseudoscience.

The fact is that you tried to say about intelligence, and then motor skills, and then went back and talked about kinesthetic intelligence because it stopped ou making a clearly bigotry driven assertion that aspies are less able to do team sports than normal sports. And all your switches are wrong.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,397

19 Nov 2011, 3:22 pm

Gedrene wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_multiple_intelligences#Critical_reception

Wikipedia wrote:
A number of articles have surveyed the use of Gardner's ideas and conclude that there is little to no academically substantiated evidence that his ideas work in practice. Steven A. Stahl found that most of the previous studies which claimed to show positive results had major flaws:
Among others, Marie Carbo claims that her learning styles work is based on research. {I discuss Carbo because she publishes extensively on her model and is very prominent in the workshop circuit...} But given the overwhelmingly negative findings in the published research, I wondered what she was citing, and about a decade ago, I thought it would be interesting to take a look. Reviewing her articles, I found that out of 17 studies she had cited, only one was published. Fifteen were doctoral dissertations and 13 of these came out of one university—St. John’s University in New York, Carbo’s alma mater. None of these had been in a peer-refereed journal. When I looked closely at the dissertations and other materials, I found that 13 of the 17 studies that supposedly support her claim had to do with learning styles based on something other than modality.


You are advocating pseudoscience.

The fact is that you tried to say about intelligence, and then motor skills, and then went back and talked about kinesthetic intelligence because it stopped ou making a clearly bigotry driven assertion that aspies are less able to do team sports than normal sports. And all your switches are wrong.


I didn't suggest there was a way to measure an IQ quotient for Kinesthetic intelligence.

This is the complaint some have against the theory of multiple intelligence, however many educationalists support the practical value of the approaches suggested by the theory.

from the same article you quote from:


Quote:
The theory has been met with mixed responses. Traditional intelligence tests and psychometrics have generally found high correlations between different tasks and aspects of intelligence, rather than the low correlations which Gardner's theory predicts. Nevertheless many educationalists support the practical value of the approaches suggested by the theory.[1]



Quote:
Other multiple intelligences that have been identified in the same article that you are quoting are logical-mathematical intelligence, linguistic intelligence, spatial intelligence, and music intelligence.


A criticism for IQ tests used on autistic children is that they measure linguistic intelligence rather than non-verbal fluid intelligence measured by other testing measures, in which they do much better. A theory now that is proposed in the field of autism research, is that Autistic individuals cannot be accessed properly with tests now used by psychologists that rely on linguistic/verbal intelligence measures.

Temple Grandhin's argument is that some people with autism have higher levels of visual-spatial intelligence than linguistic or verbal intelligence.

There are actual studies in children with Aspergers that show a difference in the Cerebellum of those children, the area of the brain that impacts Kinesthetic Intelligence/Motor Skills Abilities. Call it motor skills ability if you want to instead of kinesthetic intelligence, but it has clearly been identified as a clinical feature of Aspergers/Autism that individuals with autism and aspergers have problems with motor skills, which result in deficits in coordination, fine motor skills, and posture, and profeciency in these skills are required in team sports as well as individual sports. Fortunately they can be improved, with proper physical education.

And again, just because this doesn't apply to you or your friends, doesn't mean it isn't applicable to the majority of other individuals with autism/aspergers. The ICD 10 diagnostic manual, used in Europe, includes motor skills difficulties in it's definition of Aspergers as a usually occuring issue in those diagnosed with Aspergers. It is not considered a co-morbid condition of Aspergers it is considered a clinical feature of aspergers.



Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

19 Nov 2011, 4:12 pm

aghogday wrote:
I didn't suggest there was a way to measure an IQ quotient for Kinesthetic intelligence.
Not what I was saying. What I was saying is that Kinesthetic intelligence is a pseudoscientific concept.

aghogday wrote:
This is the complaint some have against the theory of multiple intelligence, however many educationalists support the practical value of the approaches suggested by the theory.
No. For starters the concept is not practice in any major part of the american education system. It was completely ignored in the no child left behind programme.

It is heavily criticized by a battery of scientists for various reasons including this one:
Wiki wrote:
One major criticism of the theory is that it is ad hoc: that Gardner is not expanding the definition of the word "intelligence"; rather, he denies the existence of intelligence as traditionally understood and instead uses the word "intelligence" whenever other people have traditionally used words like "ability". This practice has been criticized by Robert J. Sternberg (1983, 1991), Eysenck (1994), and Scarr (1985).


It is the pet theory of a Howard Gardner and nothing else

aghogday wrote:
Autistic individuals cannot be accessed properly with tests now used by psychologists that rely on linguistic/verbal intelligence measures.
That is a misrepresentation of the word intelligence with ability. Intelligence is only to do strctly with mental capacity, and this theory of multiple intelligences is simply taking the idea of the ability to do things and mixing it up with intelligence. There is no such thing as verbal intelligence. Intelligence is only a factor of the ability to abstract, formulate ideas and express them. Not being able to express ideas may be because o less actual intelligence or it may be because of motor issues with the mouth.

aghogday wrote:
call it motor skills ability if you want to instead of kinesthetic intelligence

That's because it is obviously what is being talked about.

aghogday wrote:
which result in deficits in coordination, fine motor skills, and posture,

All three can be improved through constant practice, repetition and so forth in many more case than would be believed. Posture in my case improved after my dad made a point of trying to improve it. My coordination improved because I was pressured to be good, and so I got much better. There are many who have issues, but they are seperate issues from me, not simply less severe ones.

aghogday wrote:
And again, just because this doesn't apply to you or your friends, doesn't mean it isn't applicable to the majority of other individuals with autism/aspergers.
You keep trying to implicate me in ignoring other's issues, when in fact it is you who are simply being too far reaching in how hard it is to overturn the issues, how many it effects. Everything is about increasing the likelihood of your chosen group's utility, even if it means ignoring common sense facts. When I point out the facts of the matter there is always the accusation of black and white thinking, explicit or implicit. The constant bolding stinks of desparation.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,397

19 Nov 2011, 5:21 pm

Gedrene wrote:
aghogday wrote:
I didn't suggest there was a way to measure an IQ quotient for Kinesthetic intelligence.
Not what I was saying. What I was saying is that Kinesthetic intelligence is a pseudoscientific concept.

aghogday wrote:
This is the complaint some have against the theory of multiple intelligence, however many educationalists support the practical value of the approaches suggested by the theory.
No. For starters the concept is not practice in any major part of the american education system. It was completely ignored in the no child left behind programme.

It is heavily criticized by a battery of scientists for various reasons including this one:
Wiki wrote:
One major criticism of the theory is that it is ad hoc: that Gardner is not expanding the definition of the word "intelligence"; rather, he denies the existence of intelligence as traditionally understood and instead uses the word "intelligence" whenever other people have traditionally used words like "ability". This practice has been criticized by Robert J. Sternberg (1983, 1991), Eysenck (1994), and Scarr (1985).


It is the pet theory of a Howard Gardner and nothing else

aghogday wrote:
Autistic individuals cannot be accessed properly with tests now used by psychologists that rely on linguistic/verbal intelligence measures.
That is a misrepresentation of the word intelligence with ability. Intelligence is only to do strctly with mental capacity, and this theory of multiple intelligences is simply taking the idea of the ability to do things and mixing it up with intelligence. There is no such thing as verbal intelligence. Intelligence is only a factor of the ability to abstract, formulate ideas and express them. Not being able to express ideas may be because o less actual intelligence or it may be because of motor issues with the mouth.

aghogday wrote:
call it motor skills ability if you want to instead of kinesthetic intelligence

That's because it is obviously what is being talked about.

aghogday wrote:
which result in deficits in coordination, fine motor skills, and posture,

All three can be improved through constant practice, repetition and so forth in many more case than would be believed. Posture in my case improved after my dad made a point of trying to improve it. My coordination improved because I was pressured to be good, and so I got much better. There are many who have issues, but they are seperate issues from me, not simply less severe ones.

aghogday wrote:
And again, just because this doesn't apply to you or your friends, doesn't mean it isn't applicable to the majority of other individuals with autism/aspergers.
You keep trying to implicate me in ignoring other's issues, when in fact it is you who are simply being too far reaching in how hard it is to overturn the issues, how many it effects. Everything is about increasing the likelihood of your chosen group's utility, even if it means ignoring common sense facts. When I point out the facts of the matter there is always the accusation of black and white thinking, explicit or implicit. The constant bolding stinks of desparation.


The only proof you have provided that motor skill problems are not a clinical feature of autism/aspergers, is anecdotal evidence that you and your friends don't have the clinical feature in Aspergers of motor skills problems, I'm not trying to implicate you and your friends in anything, this though is the only anecdotal evidence that you offered to support your opinion that motor skills were not a clinical feature of autism/aspergers You stated it was a co-morbid condition, which it is not, it is a clinical feature.

If you can provide real evidence, that is not just anecdotal evidence from a few people, from a third party source, I will consider the validity of your opinion.

The ICD10 lists it in their definition of Aspergers and it has been well known in clinical practice since 1995. I think these folks have a more comprehensive understanding of the clinical features after dealing with thousands of individuals with autism, than you and your understanding from a few of your friends and yourself.

Yes, the abilities can be improved, and not all people with autism or aspergers have the issue, but it is a common issue that is a clinical feature of autism/aspergers.

I stated that many educatioalists support the practical value of the approaches suggested by the theory of multiple intelligences.

You attempt to refute this quote that was included from the same article you present, with the fact that multiple intelligences were not included in the "no child left behind program".

Quote:
The theory has been met with mixed responses. Traditional intelligence tests and psychometrics have generally found high correlations between different tasks and aspects of intelligence, rather than the low correlations which Gardner's theory predicts. Nevertheless many educationalists support the practical value of the approaches suggested by the theory.[1]


Not everyone agrees with this theory but as per your own evidence quoted from Wiki many educationalists support the practical value of the approaches suggested by the theory.

Just because some people don't support the theory does not mean that others do and your own article makes it clear that many educationlists do support it.



Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

19 Nov 2011, 5:41 pm

aghogday wrote:
The only proof you have provided that motor skill problems are not a clinical feature of autism/aspergers,
Again, you are lying about what I said. I said that such a deficit would be called moto skills, not kinesthetic intelligence or whatever pseudoscience and high redefinition was being blabbered about. I NEVER said that no autistic suffers no motor skill problems.

This is an accusation worthy of reprimand.

aghogday wrote:
If you can provide real evidence, that is not just anecdotal evidence, from a third party source, and I will consider the validity of your opinion
This coming from a person who either simply reports that there is evidence or says that a scientific evidence is correct despite massive flaws in methodology.

aghogday wrote:
I stated that many educatioalists support the practical value of the approaches suggested by the theory of multiple intelligences.
And I say that it's a foolish idea because of many good reasons showing it was a lie and a pet theory of one man and a creche of people who do not have any scientific credence.
Gedrene wrote:
No. For starters the concept is not practice in any major part of the american education system. It was completely ignored in the no child left behind programme.

It is heavily criticized by a battery of scientists for various reasons including this one:
Wiki wrote:
One major criticism of the theory is that it is ad hoc: that Gardner is not expanding the definition of the word "intelligence"; rather, he denies the existence of intelligence as traditionally understood and instead uses the word "intelligence" whenever other people have traditionally used words like "ability". This practice has been criticized by Robert J. Sternberg (1983, 1991), Eysenck (1994), and Scarr (1985).


T say that it is wrong because many people support it is argumentum ad numerum., another logical fallacy.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,397

19 Nov 2011, 7:05 pm

Gedrene wrote:
aghogday wrote:
The only proof you have provided that motor skill problems are not a clinical feature of autism/aspergers,
Again, you are lying about what I said. I said that such a deficit would be called moto skills, not kinesthetic intelligence or whatever pseudoscience and high redefinition was being blabbered about. I NEVER said that no autistic suffers no motor skill problems.

This is an accusation worthy of reprimand.

aghogday wrote:
If you can provide real evidence, that is not just anecdotal evidence, from a third party source, and I will consider the validity of your opinion
This coming from a person who either simply reports that there is evidence or says that a scientific evidence is correct despite massive flaws in methodology.

aghogday wrote:
I stated that many educatioalists support the practical value of the approaches suggested by the theory of multiple intelligences.
And I say that it's a foolish idea because of many good reasons showing it was a lie and a pet theory of one man and a creche of people who do not have any scientific credence.
Gedrene wrote:
No. For starters the concept is not practice in any major part of the american education system. It was completely ignored in the no child left behind programme.

It is heavily criticized by a battery of scientists for various reasons including this one:
Wiki wrote:
One major criticism of the theory is that it is ad hoc: that Gardner is not expanding the definition of the word "intelligence"; rather, he denies the existence of intelligence as traditionally understood and instead uses the word "intelligence" whenever other people have traditionally used words like "ability". This practice has been criticized by Robert J. Sternberg (1983, 1991), Eysenck (1994), and Scarr (1985).


T say that it is wrong because many people support it is argumentum ad numerum., another logical fallacy.


You already asserted in another post that motor skills among the other features that I listed as clinical features of aspergers from a third part resource, could only be co-morbids associated with low functioning autism.

My opposition is to your denial that motor skill problems are clinical features of aspergers. As quoted below you suggested that the motor skill issues among other issues, that I quoted from a reputable third part resource, could only be co-morbids in low functioning autism. I never suggested that you said they were not associated with autism in anyway.

Gedrene Wrote:

Quote:
Pff, here we go. Shadow accusations once more. You don't even know what special interests I have, never mind whether I have any. I had speech delay, supposedly, until 3 years of age and then raced ahead during my primary school years. I had no interest in other people's petty games that you vaunt as meaning we have deficits and I most certainly never took interest on sociability for its own sake. My own element has always been with other people with this asperger's diagnosis, most of which do not have fine motor skill issues.


aghogday wrote:

Quote:
Problems with fine motor control, clumsiness, and posture, are not co-morbids with autism and aspergers, they are actual clinical features of Autism and Aspergers that are usually part of the disorder in people with a diagnosis.


Gedrene wrote:

Quote:
And a sign of ironically very clumsy work on the behalf of clinicians with no understanding of the actual core autism diagnosis, which is:
- communication difficulties
-a lack of social interest
-poor grasp of irrelevant communicative features such as analogy
-strong personal interests.

To say anything else is autism one is talking about low functioning autism not aspergers, and even then it's clear that it's a comorbidity


I'm not suggesting that most educationalists in the Education system uses the theory of multiple intelligences, but the article you referenced clearly states that many educationalists support the theory and use it in a practical manner. You did not include the evidence in your responses back to me, but it is clearly stated in your article.

That is no evidence about whether the theory is right or wrong, it is just evidence presented by the article you presented that many educationalists see merit in the theory and use it in the education system.

The theory of kinesthetic intelligence is commonly understood in the field of Exercise physiology. I've known about it since the 80's.

Anyway, that part doesn't really matter, I made a reference to it, because it is a commonly understood theory, and problems in motor skills among individuals with Aspergers is a clinical feature usually seen in aspergers. That's what we've been disagreeing on, you suggested it could only be a co-morbid in low functioning autism.

And again, the only evidence, that I can see that you have provided so far, is that it is not a clinical feature of Aspergers, is your comment about the element of Aspergers folks you know most of which don't have issues with fine motor control.

If that wasn't evidence, then I guess you have no evidence at all, not even anecdotal evidence, to provide that motor skills issues are not a clinical feature of Aspergers.

I've already provided evidence from the ICD10 that defines motor skills issues as a characteristic of Aspergers in their definition of the condition.



vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,110
Location: Left WP forever

19 Nov 2011, 7:32 pm

aghogday wrote:
Gedrene wrote:
aghogday wrote:
The only proof you have provided that motor skill problems are not a clinical feature of autism/aspergers,
Again, you are lying about what I said. I said that such a deficit would be called moto skills, not kinesthetic intelligence or whatever pseudoscience and high redefinition was being blabbered about. I NEVER said that no autistic suffers no motor skill problems.

This is an accusation worthy of reprimand.

aghogday wrote:
If you can provide real evidence, that is not just anecdotal evidence, from a third party source, and I will consider the validity of your opinion
This coming from a person who either simply reports that there is evidence or says that a scientific evidence is correct despite massive flaws in methodology.

aghogday wrote:
I stated that many educatioalists support the practical value of the approaches suggested by the theory of multiple intelligences.
And I say that it's a foolish idea because of many good reasons showing it was a lie and a pet theory of one man and a creche of people who do not have any scientific credence.
Gedrene wrote:
No. For starters the concept is not practice in any major part of the american education system. It was completely ignored in the no child left behind programme.

It is heavily criticized by a battery of scientists for various reasons including this one:
Wiki wrote:
One major criticism of the theory is that it is ad hoc: that Gardner is not expanding the definition of the word "intelligence"; rather, he denies the existence of intelligence as traditionally understood and instead uses the word "intelligence" whenever other people have traditionally used words like "ability". This practice has been criticized by Robert J. Sternberg (1983, 1991), Eysenck (1994), and Scarr (1985).


T say that it is wrong because many people support it is argumentum ad numerum., another logical fallacy.


You already asserted in another post that motor skills among the other features that I listed as clinical features of aspergers from a third part resource, could only be co-morbids associated with low functioning autism.

My opposition is to your denial that motor skill problems are clinical features of aspergers. As quoted below you suggested that the motor skill issues among other issues, that I quoted from a reputable third part resource, could only be co-morbids in low functioning autism. I never suggested that you said they were not associated with autism in anyway.

Gedrene Wrote:

Quote:
Pff, here we go. Shadow accusations once more. You don't even know what special interests I have, never mind whether I have any. I had speech delay, supposedly, until 3 years of age and then raced ahead during my primary school years. I had no interest in other people's petty games that you vaunt as meaning we have deficits and I most certainly never took interest on sociability for its own sake. My own element has always been with other people with this asperger's diagnosis, most of which do not have fine motor skill issues.


aghogday wrote:

Quote:
Problems with fine motor control, clumsiness, and posture, are not co-morbids with autism and aspergers, they are actual clinical features of Autism and Aspergers that are usually part of the disorder in people with a diagnosis.


Gedrene wrote:

Quote:
And a sign of ironically very clumsy work on the behalf of clinicians with no understanding of the actual core autism diagnosis, which is:
- communication difficulties
-a lack of social interest
-poor grasp of irrelevant communicative features such as analogy
-strong personal interests.

To say anything else is autism one is talking about low functioning autism not aspergers, and even then it's clear that it's a comorbidity


I'm not suggesting that most educationalists in the Education system uses the theory of multiple intelligences, but the article you referenced clearly states that many educationalists support the theory and use it in a practical manner. You did not include the evidence in your responses back to me, but it is clearly stated in your article.

That is no evidence about whether the theory is right or wrong, it is just evidence presented by the article you presented that many educationalists see merit in the theory and use it in the education system.

The theory of kinesthetic intelligence is commonly understood in the field of Exercise physiology. I've known about it since the 80's.

Anyway, that part doesn't really matter, I made a reference to it, because it is a commonly understood theory, and problems in motor skills among individuals with Aspergers is a clinical feature usually seen in aspergers. That's what we've been disagreeing on, you suggested it could only be a co-morbid in low functioning autism.

And again, the only evidence, that I can see that you have provided so far, is that it is not a clinical feature of Aspergers, is your comment about the element of Aspergers folks you know most of which don't have issues with fine motor control.

If that wasn't evidence, then I guess you have no evidence at all, not even anecdotal evidence, to provide that motor skills issues are not a clinical feature of Aspergers.

I've already provided evidence from the ICD10 that defines motor skills issues as a characteristic of Aspergers in their definition of the condition.
aghogday is right about fine motor delay


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined