Page 1 of 2 [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

d057
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2008
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 504
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

03 Dec 2015, 10:20 am

Hello everyone,

This is my latest blog about Steve Silberman’s new book “NeuroTribes.”

I hope you enjoy it and please feel free to leave a comment!

https://dwarren57.wordpress.com/2015/12 ... ribes1of2/


_________________
Living my life one day at a time.


ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,245
Location: Long Island, New York

03 Dec 2015, 10:58 am

Steve Sielberman describes himself as a boring NT. Having listened to and watched many interviews with him he presents as very naturally social. He is a gay 57 year old man. If you know anything about how LGBT people were viewed in the 1960's and 1970's when he grew up you will see a lot of similarities to the way autistics are viewed and treated. Silberman cites bieng gay in that era and coming from family where his parents were activists for his understanding.

As far as Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg and the like being autistic there is no more then suspicion, there is no proof. In my personal opinion there is more reason to suspect Gates then Zuckerberg. To create Facebook one needs to have a solid understanding of how NT's interact. If they are autistic they have every right to choose not to reveal it or even seek a diagnosis. Making blanket unequivocal statements that these people are autistic is wrong.

I am only reacting to part one so part two may answer the following critism. Your review as well as that of critics of the book harp on the Autistic geniuses. Autistics geniuses are well represented in the book but so are what Silbermen describes as profoundly Autistic people.

My view is that Silberman is the greatest ally we have ever had.

The following is an hour long podcast interview with him where he discusses his personal motivations as well as go into some detail from the book
http://www.scienceforthepeople.ca/episodes/neurotribes


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


d057
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2008
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 504
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

03 Dec 2015, 3:04 pm

I think it is possible that Zuckerberg may be on the spectrum, but I think that Gate's story is more believable.

ASPartOfMe wrote:
Steve Sielberman describes himself as a boring NT. Having listened to and watched many interviews with him he presents as very naturally social. He is a gay 57 year old man. If you know anything about how LGBT people were viewed in the 1960's and 1970's when he grew up you will see a lot of similarities to the way autistics are viewed and treated. Silberman cites bieng gay in that era and coming from family where his parents were activists for his understanding.

As far as Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg and the like being autistic there is no more then suspicion, there is no proof. In my personal opinion there is more reason to suspect Gates then Zuckerberg. To create Facebook one needs to have a solid understanding of how NT's interact. If they are autistic they have every right to choose not to reveal it or even seek a diagnosis. Making blanket unequivocal statements that these people are autistic is wrong.

I am only reacting to part one so part two may answer the following critism. Your review as well as that of critics of the book harp on the Autistic geniuses. Autistics geniuses are well represented in the book but so are what Silbermen describes as profoundly Autistic people.

My view is that Silberman is the greatest ally we have ever had.

The following is an hour long podcast interview with him where he discusses his personal motivations as well as go into some detail from the book
http://www.scienceforthepeople.ca/episodes/neurotribes


_________________
Living my life one day at a time.


Dennis Prichard
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 3 Dec 2015
Age: 44
Posts: 214
Location: China

04 Dec 2015, 1:08 am

I read part of the interview.

I was very interested in how he used "cool" to describe an autistic spectrum person he tried to start a conversation with.

"Cool" as a way to describe the way people relate to each other does not gel with me.
I prefer specific terms like "someone who can elevate my social position", this has a much better ring.

It's nothing against this writer, its just that "normal" "healthy" people are always never clear about the motives with which they deal with other people. I believe it is because if they did they'd find why they do things less than flattering.

I should explain that I feel this way because I have gone most of my life giving myself hell for my "questionable" conduct in dealing with other people. Now I'm starting to realize that other people don't do that, they don't consider the deeper reasons why they do things.

I have to reiterate its nothing against this individual, its an objection I have with the whole human race.

Mean no offence.


_________________
I'm a language teacher and amateur language scientist.
I want to develop a theory of language that can benefit people with autism as well as other disorders. I need people to knock ideas off so if you're at all interested please contact me.


d057
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2008
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 504
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

04 Dec 2015, 11:18 am

Yes, our society tends to have this very superficial definition of the word "cool."

Dennis Prichard wrote:
I read part of the interview.

I was very interested in how he used "cool" to describe an autistic spectrum person he tried to start a conversation with.

"Cool" as a way to describe the way people relate to each other does not gel with me.
I prefer specific terms like "someone who can elevate my social position", this has a much better ring.

It's nothing against this writer, its just that "normal" "healthy" people are always never clear about the motives with which they deal with other people. I believe it is because if they did they'd find why they do things less than flattering.

I should explain that I feel this way because I have gone most of my life giving myself hell for my "questionable" conduct in dealing with other people. Now I'm starting to realize that other people don't do that, they don't consider the deeper reasons why they do things.

I have to reiterate its nothing against this individual, its an objection I have with the whole human race.

Mean no offence.


_________________
Living my life one day at a time.


Dennis Prichard
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 3 Dec 2015
Age: 44
Posts: 214
Location: China

04 Dec 2015, 11:48 pm

Same thing with trite words like "being yourself" when I act like myself speak in the way I want to speak people hate my guts, even i think my close family members tolerate me only out of a sense of responsibility. Of course when you challenge somebody to explain what exactly you said wrong they're incapable of giving you a rational explanation. I guess its the vibe, its the feng shui, maybe its karma.


_________________
I'm a language teacher and amateur language scientist.
I want to develop a theory of language that can benefit people with autism as well as other disorders. I need people to knock ideas off so if you're at all interested please contact me.


vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

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

06 Dec 2015, 8:18 am

just now reading the book.love the chapter on henry cavindish


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined


DonkeyBuster
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2009
Age: 66
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,311
Location: New Mexico, USA

06 Dec 2015, 11:56 am

I'm just about finished w/the book & I'm a bit disappointed. Basically, there are only two chapters in which actual autists are heard from. Most of the book is a history of the research & experiments done TO autists, along with how the public opinion of autists was shaped (or mis-shaped). Some of it is deeply disturbing.

So to entitle the book 'the legacy of autism' is misleading. It's more like 'the legacy of some very egotistical self-promoting researchers on public perception of autists.' And he pretty much completely omits Tony Attwood.

I have enjoyed reading the book, & I think it's an important contribution to our understanding of the development of the Dx & public perception, but the voice of autists is very weak in this book.

Were others disappointed in the lack of first person autist perspective?



Hyperborean
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 956
Location: Europe

06 Dec 2015, 12:16 pm

^ So far I haven't read the book, only quite a lot of comments like yours about how a genuine, in-depth autistic viewpoint is mostly absent from it. The fact that he virtually omits Tony Atwood, who has enormous empathy for and an innate understanding of Spectrumites, implies a certain bias, even jealousy on Silberman's part. Yet as another poster said, there is a convergence between the LGBT and autistic experience, so perhaps that is a positive aspect of 'Neurotribes'.

All the hype about this book rather puts me off.



ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,245
Location: Long Island, New York

06 Dec 2015, 11:19 pm

It it is an excellent start of writing the history of the autistic people. That history has been been decided and created mostly by neurotypicals, so in that sense it is accurate. But as with any start, the foundation he created needs to be built upon. At over 500 pages it was probably is to long so important material needed to be edited out.

The hype to me is just as important as the revelations in the book. It has really changed a lot how the mainstream media is describing autism.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


o0iella
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 18 Aug 2013
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 229

28 Dec 2015, 3:42 pm

I like Steve Silberman's book, and agree with much of what he says, but I don't think people should rely on him too much.

I find that he rejects facts to suit his own moralistic agenda, this tendency could lead to him being manipulated by future trends in thought.

I also believe the autistic community will only benefit from a paradigm shift in people's thinking. Silbermann is trapped in the current paradigm of though, which means in the long term , he will not be a great benefit to us.



ASPickle
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 29 Oct 2014
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 177
Location: Denver, CO

28 Dec 2015, 5:40 pm

o0iella wrote:
I find that he rejects facts to suit his own moralistic agenda, this tendency could lead to him being manipulated by future trends in thought.

I also believe the autistic community will only benefit from a paradigm shift in people's thinking. Silbermann is trapped in the current paradigm of though, which means in the long term , he will not be a great benefit to us.


Which facts are these?

Also, I'm not quite sure what you think the "current paradigm of thought" is, but Silberman is most certainly not in the current majority when it comes to how he views Autism. That his book is such an eye-opener for the general population demonstrates this point. This book is exactly the sort that needs to be shared in order to bring about the paradigm shift you are seeking.


_________________
The Autistic Pickle is typed in front of a live studio audience.
No ghosts were harmed in the making of this post.


Dennis Prichard
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 3 Dec 2015
Age: 44
Posts: 214
Location: China

29 Dec 2015, 3:14 am

I also believe the autistic community will only benefit from a paradigm shift in people's thinking. Silbermann is trapped in the current paradigm of though, which means in the long term , he will not be a great benefit to us.[/quote]

What kind of paradigm shift are you talking about, can you describe it with specific language?


_________________
I'm a language teacher and amateur language scientist.
I want to develop a theory of language that can benefit people with autism as well as other disorders. I need people to knock ideas off so if you're at all interested please contact me.


o0iella
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 18 Aug 2013
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 229

29 Dec 2015, 7:45 am

He paints Hans Asperger as a saint who can do no wrong, while in reality, the facts are much more murky. Sure, Aspergers ideas were progressive compared to Kanner's and Bettelheim's, but he kind of makes it more black and white than it actually is.

I think there is an unfortunate tendency amongst people on the autistic spectrum to look for an NT to come in on a white horse and save us from our misery. People off the autistic spectrum end up assuming that autistic people cannot speak for themselves and need saviours like Asperger, Lorna Wing, Simon Baron-Cohen, Steve Silbermann etc. I think this is negative and needs to change.

As others have mentioned, the book pays very little attention to self-advocacy organisations and instead mainly focuses on how great people like Asperger and Lorna Wing were. Despite the fact that his views are more progressive than most, it still maintains the "NT-Saviour" narrative, and this why it remains stuck in the current paradigm that maintains that autistics are helpless and cannot manage their own affairs.

Autistic people need have total control over the narrative about us, and need to fight for our own interests, as we understand them better than others do. Don't get me wrong, the book is better than nothing, but it doesn't deserve all the praise it gets and shouldn't be used as an excuse to rest on our laurels. The fact that the most prominent book on autism has been written by a NT journalist represents a failure of the autistic community.

Autistic people should get the last and the loudest words on Autism

Nothing about us without us.



ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,245
Location: Long Island, New York

29 Dec 2015, 10:32 am

o0iella wrote:
I like Steve Silberman's book, and agree with much of what he says, but I don't think people should rely on him too much.

I find that he rejects facts to suit his own moralistic agenda, this tendency could lead to him being manipulated by future trends in thought.

I also believe the autistic community will only benefit from a paradigm shift in people's thinking. Silbermann is trapped in the current paradigm of though, which means in the long term , he will not be a great benefit to us.


To me the book represents an opportunity to be a turning point. But as with any opportunity it needs to be siezed. IMHO the autstic rights movement and particularly how autistics view themselves have deteriorated sharply since the DSM 5 came out. A lot of autistics have accepted how the bullying part of the NT spectrum defines autism and thier stereotypes of how there are hordes of Aspie wannabees and elitists ruining things for real impaired autistics like themselves. A turning point is desperatly needed. And in the end it does not really matter who is the spark is for a turning point is as long as it occurs. Sure it would have more pleasing to me if Silberman is autistic. But there is not going to be an Autistic white night to rescue us either, that only occurs in Hollywood movies. The people who have made the greatest changes are often deeply flawed people who made mistakes that hurt while getting it mostly right.

It might have not been enough but I learned a lot about how the autistic rights movement began from the book. As for Hans Asperger while I do not retro diagnose people that are lot of people smarter then me that think he was. While the advocates of today face large obstacles none these obstacles are quite like trying to save autistic lives while working for Nazi Eugenicists. So to sit here and nitpick is just not right. I am confident as new histories are written a more nuanced view of Asperger will happen.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


ASPickle
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 29 Oct 2014
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 177
Location: Denver, CO

29 Dec 2015, 1:26 pm

o0iella wrote:
I think there is an unfortunate tendency amongst people on the autistic spectrum to look for an NT to come in on a white horse and save us from our misery. People off the autistic spectrum end up assuming that autistic people cannot speak for themselves and need saviours like Asperger, Lorna Wing, Simon Baron-Cohen, Steve Silbermann etc. I think this is negative and needs to change.


I, for one, am happy to welcome any NT ally. It's not waiting for a white horse. It's amplifying the message that needs to be heard. I don't see how disenfranchising those who want to help us will end up helping us at all. If anything, it alienates us further.


o0iella wrote:
As others have mentioned, the book pays very little attention to self-advocacy organisations and instead mainly focuses on how great people like Asperger and Lorna Wing were.


I mean,... I guess if you ignore those two chapters at the end... :roll:

I was a bit disappointed that modern advocacy efforts received such a small portion of the book until I remembered that it's a book about the history of Autism. It was already 400+ pages at that point. Current and future efforts are still being determined. By better understanding where we came from, NTs are better prepared to move forward with us.


o0iella wrote:
Autistic people need have total control over the narrative about us, and need to fight for our own interests, as we understand them better than others do.


Let's be real, here. No one has total control over the narrative about themselves. It has to be a cooperative venture.


o0iella wrote:
Don't get me wrong, the book is better than nothing, but it doesn't deserve all the praise it gets and shouldn't be used as an excuse to rest on our laurels. The fact that the most prominent book on autism has been written by a NT journalist represents a failure of the autistic community.


Whoever said we were resting on our laurels? Did I miss something in the book that said we were done with our struggle?

And yes, the most prominent book on the history of Autism is written by an NT journalist. So what? The target audience is predominantly NT. To exclude this book from Autistic canon (for lack of better term) simply because an NT wrote it is unwise.

It's not the end all be all that you're framing it as. It's a step along the way to fuller inclusion. As ASPartOfMe says, it's an opportunity for a turning point. For me, the book isn't as important as the dialogue it has spurred in the form of NPR interviews with Silberman, articles on various newsfeeds, the Samuel Johnson Prize, etc.. Let's face it, the average person out there won't read a 500+ page book about Autism. But they will listen to a podcast or read a quick blurb or see a headline online about how maybe the general populace is wrong about Autism. And, yes, then it's upon us Autistics to further that discussion. If that discussion gets started through an NT ally's fastidiously researched book, so be it.


_________________
The Autistic Pickle is typed in front of a live studio audience.
No ghosts were harmed in the making of this post.