Interview With Simon Baron Cohen - Need Your Help

Post Reply New Topic

Wow. I get the distinct impression there is not much love loss here for SBC. TM, I hope, if you use many of these questions, that you plan to reword most of them before you ask them. Else it may appear you're just trying to rip him a new one.

That won't get you very far, but I see that you've already considered that.

I've never read anything of his, and don't have much desire to. I've heard enough to have lost any interest I might have had had I heard of him beforehand.

Can't think of any questions either, unfortunately. Sorry.

Clap clap clap!! I encourage this wildly.
Although it might not be enough to challenge HIS beliefs, others reading his inability to question Freud's theories might wonder how it affects his views.
Blodletting and trepanation lol.....completely.

I don't know which samples you are referring to, but I do know that the Autism Research Centre in Cambridge does research on volunteers who have been diagnosed with autism. I have participated in several studies and they have also allowed other centres studying autism to contact me to see if I want to participate in their research.

A question I would like to know: should there be different criteria for diagnosing male and female aspies? It seems to me that some of the 'typical' aspie traits apply more to men than to women. I know that the psychologist at the ARC who diagnosed me said that women are underdiagnosed.

And best of luck with the interview! It sounds like a fantastic opportunity and I look forward to reading it when it's published on WP.

Last edited by DreamSofa on 01 Dec 2011, 12:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

If his theory that the autisitc female mind is basically an extreme male one is he saying that all female autistic s are either trangender or gay (which is not true) therefore if that theory was true that makes every single male in the world autistic.

First post here been lurking a while and I like what I see.

I really like Dreamsofa's phrasing of the male/female question.

I got all excited that you interviewed Sacha Baron Cohen and that he or one of his daughters were an aspie. But then I reread the discussion title.

I hope some of the questions will be challenging, but I never intended the interview to be antagonistic. I greatly respect his work, even if I do not fully agree with all of his conclusions. I think it is very important to remain constructive.

That is a terrific way to approach it and I commend you.

I cannot support the posts that all but call for SBC to be hung and quartered because of his views on ASD.

Do they interview you before you participate? I was looking more at the controls and his whole gender theories. Im sure interviewing a person, most psych researchers can get a vague idea on how they might score on the tests. I know with research, there's a ton of subtle ways in which you can skew your results to your favor.

Dreamsofa: I haven't seen anyone suggesting TM be anything other that totally respectful. Simon Baron-Cohen is a dishonest hack. That means you can be polite, honest and direct and if you aren't pandering to his reputation then he will feel uncomfortable. Do you see how that works? Can you understand that? It's the difference between being right and being wrong.

Dancing with the devil has its own rewards...

Also, if Autism is the extreme male mind than why is it that the behavior of autistic females does not stand out as much, resulting in underdiagnosis in females?

Hmmm...one person above said something about "civilly diss[ing]" SBC. And suggesting that he be asked if he is "narcissistic". And saying .

And the statement is pretty unpleasant, to say the least.

That's not respectful. Calling him a "dishonest hack" isn't respectful either, nor is it polite or honest. And "pandering to his reputation"? Wow. That's some baggage, there.

And what is this supposed to mean?

What? We're all drooling ret*ds? How does somebody 'look' like they have Asperger's?

No, I don't see how it works. I'm an academic and I see the difference between interviewing someone to explore their ideas - even if you don't agree with them - and being nasty and snide and unpleasant and engaging in ad hominem attacks behind someone's back. The first is being right and the second is being wrong.

Ai Ling, I'm not sure what you mean by;

Does who interview me?

When I looked at the ARC web site some time ago, there was a note saying that anyone who had been diagnosed was welcome to participate in research. I participated in ARC research earlier this year and since then I have been contacted three more times by other research centres wanting to know if I would be willing to be a research participant. At first I was enthusiastic abou the idea of participating in research and now I'm going off the idea slightly...

I'm not sure how I feel about being a human guinea pig. But, hey. I might feel differently tomorrow!

Everything I said is true. You wouldn't call him a dishonest hack in an interview; the point of an interview would be to reveal that. But if you feel questions like "How would you feel if you were told you lacked empathy?" are disrespectful, when they're just direct, then you have to ask why they appear disrespectful. The answer is because they elegantly reveal SBC to be a dishonest hack. Maybe that feels cruel to you. Personally I think that the truth is worth more than anyone's reputation.

Of course! I expected as much from you.

No offense meant to anyone else here, because I get where you all are coming from, and some of you are saying what I think, but would not say to SBC face to face. I'm just glad TM is filtering it all before he uses any of it.