Lovely little essay on neurotypical privilege
Especially since they've already found somewhere around 27 autistic genes... and counting...
_________________
Now take a trip with me but don't be surprised when things aren't what they seem. I've known it from the start all these good ideas will tear your brain apart. Scared, but you can follow me. I'm too weird to live but much too rare to die. - a7x
Yes, it's just an predisposition, it doesn't necessitate autism. The more of them you have the greater chance of having autism, but not greater severity. And so researchers have another 100 genes they are looking at to find association.
The whole thing is just expanding. It isn't very simple at all, in fact autism is probably spread throughout the human genome. A cure is fantastical and unrealistic.
_________________
Now take a trip with me but don't be surprised when things aren't what they seem. I've known it from the start all these good ideas will tear your brain apart. Scared, but you can follow me. I'm too weird to live but much too rare to die. - a7x
Psychologists provide talk therapy to clients...
Yeah, that's why beginning with my intro psychology class, I was taught that distinction.
Thanks and I agree . I'm not sure how we would go about getting more of us in these positions though :/. I'm not sure if it would involve better resources (like improved interventions or therapies or schools) or something else altogether, but improvements could definitely be made in those areas, even for those who aren't interested in these types of careers.
That's true because genetics are complicated. Autism symptoms overlap with a lot of other disorders so it's possible that some of those genes are actually more associated with the known comorbid disorders instead of autism itself.
_________________
Diagnosed with ADHD combined type (02/09/16) and ASD Level 1 (04/28/16).
In reviewing this thread, which I began to generate discussion about the links between the neurodiversity, privilege, somehow the issue of separatism came up. I'm confused about the relevance this side issue - do you mean separatism within the ASD community being divided for or against a neurodiversity perspective, or separatism within the psychology/medical community developing from a schism between the two perspectives (the current vs neurodiverse) as the paradigm changes in time, or something else?
I think the OP was focusing on mental health professionals. However many on this thread are talking more broadly about autists versus NTs...
While it's possible for autistic communities to be established, separatism is a furfie and futile. It's a fantasy like the Douglas Adams book "Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy" where dolphins and mice actually secretly live in their own intelligent societies. Many of us live in a fantasy that we can create a entirely self sufficient autistic community.
Ok, now I see it. I began the thread to consider the merits of a paradigm change, which would actually promote inclusion, not separatism - which is a different topic altogether from NT vs ASD separatism, and I hope the thread doesn't go off on that tangent. Thanks for the clarification Cyberdad.
They'll never find it because it doesn't exist. Even IF autism or A.S. turn out to have a basis in genetics, the notion that there is, or would be, a single gene for it is based upon a lack of understanding of how genes actually work. There is almost never a single gene for anything, a combination of factors, both environmental and hereditary, coming into play.
Why can't people just write in clear English?
It is just marketing speak for big change that will advance something.
Back to one of the main points. The reason why scientific jargon is used is because it has a clear definition unlike the words he used that can change definition at will since they never had a strict scientific definition. Thus, you can redefine words to prove your point. For example, one can see this in recent cases such as the increase in college rape. However, if you look at their research they have just changed the definition of rape to get the results they want. Hence, why I believe we should purge all social science and psychology as it has become not science but a massive brain washing machine that is going against the pursuit of understanding which science is.
Last edited by Orangez on 07 Jan 2015, 9:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Why can't people just write in clear English?
A paradigm is an over-arching, presuppositional philosophy or assumption that is accepted as given, and which forms the basis for subsequent speculation about the nature of that which logically follows from it. For example, scientism (as opposed to 'science') is the belief that only that which can be demonstrated to be true via the scientific method actually has any value to society, and from this assumption flows the belief that (for example) naturalism is true and the supernatural not only does not exist, but that the concept itself is meaningless. When a change in a paradigm occurs it is usually revolutionary, and overturns a lot of intellectual baggage that has thus far accumulated.
Why can't people just write in clear English?
A paradigm is an over-arching, presuppositional philosophy or assumption that is accepted as given, and which forms the basis for subsequent speculation about the nature of that which logically follows from it. For example, scientism (as opposed to 'science') is the belief that only that which can be demonstrated to be true via the scientific method actually has any value to society, and from this assumption flows the belief that (for example) naturalism is true and the supernatural not only does not exist, but that the concept itself is meaningless. When a change in a paradigm occurs it is usually revolutionary, and overturns a lot of intellectual baggage that has thus far accumulated.
Lovely definition Lintar, couldn't have put it better myself!
Conversely, what a paradigm is not, is a different perspective. A paradigm is overarching in its scope; a perspective is a point of view, such as this 2007 piece from Tony Attwood "positive diagnostic criteria" which he uses to make the point that the perception of something as being pathological is defined by the way it is negatively diagnosed:
(Alternative, Positive) Discovery criteria for Aspergers by Attwood and Gray
A. A qualitative advantage in social interaction, as manifested by a majority of the following:
1. peer relationships characterized by absolute loyalty and impeccable dependability
2. free of sexist, "age-ist", or culturalist biases; ability to regard others at "face value"
3. speaking one’s mind irrespective of social context or adherence to personal beliefs
4. ability to pursue personal theory or perspective despite conflicting evidence
5. seeking an audience or friends capable of: enthusiasm for unique interests and topics;
6. consideration of details; spending time discussing a topic that may not be of primary interest
7. listening without continual judgement or assumption
8. interested primarily in significant contributions to conversation; preferring to avoid ‘ritualistic small talk’ or socially trivial statements and superficial conversation.
9. seeking sincere, positive, genuine friends with an unassuming sense of humour
There is more to that article, though I think the above is sufficient to illustrate the overall point..
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
I can't keep female neurotypical friends |
14 Mar 2024, 8:53 pm |
Neurotypical word usage and semantics a.k.a. NO MORE ISMS |
06 Mar 2024, 8:42 am |