Expressing Doubts: First Scientific Refutal Of Asperger's

Post Reply New Topic

It certainly is empathy. I bragged about it with the intent on hurting my therapist's feelings knowing very well it would, and I was right. You're mistaking apathy for a lack of empathy. There seems to be confusion over what empathy actually is, so everyone is free to watch this.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5jrUg_kXjY&list=FL6xeVnssvsmG87sa9tgjPug&index=121[/youtube]Now, everyone must question this. Do you really all lack empathy or are you just apathetic?

This was the point I was trying to make but I failed to do so. I'm just glad to see this here.

This, too, was another point I attempted to make when I said that the Asperger's diagnosis serves no purpose(credit to foxfield). For example, Kim Peek, the savant man whom Rain Man was based off of, might have been comparable and diagnosed as having severe autism among other things. He ended up dying a couple years ago. However, his autopsy showed he had Opitz–Kaveggia syndrome, a rare genetic disease linked with the X Chromosome which causes severe developmental delays which appeared as autistic traits(and I don't know or care whether Kim was ever regarded as autistic, I'm just using this as an example). So if I can elaborate to everyone else:

Kim Peek
Disorder 1: Opitz–Kaveggia syndrome
Disorder 2: Autism
Disorder 1 cause: Genetic defect of X Chromosome
Disorder 2 cause: Unknown
Disorder 1 effect: Low muscle tone, severe developmental delays, macrocephaly characteristic
Disorder 2 effect: Unknown
So the point I tried to make in the opening post is that the diagnosis serves no purpose and does nothing to explain what makes someone the way they are. As a concept autism might serve no purpose.

a) I'm trying to refute the concept of Aspeger's syndrome, and though I make the claim it doesn't exist, I mean so in the aspect it doesn't exist under the basis it's a neurological disorder. When it comes to full blown autism, I'm slightly less knowledgeable on the matter, but still think the concept of autism is useless if other disorders with known effects are better suited to define someone.

b) I assert there is neurological difference by default; dumb people may have a smaller prefrontal cortex, happy people may have higher releases of endorphin when experiencing joy, people with difficulty understanding empathy may have a deficiency in oxytocin. I assert the difference exists but that it's not a disorder and/or disease.

I'm responding to The Walrus. The posts from him I left out are the ones I agree on at least partially.

Those aren't causes of autism, and I've covered this in my post about Kim Peek. The idea is that, for example, Rubella already occupies all the traits of autism and hence there's no need for someone with Congenital Rubella Syndrome to be diagnosed with autism.


You insinuate that a deficiency in the autistic brain makes it harder for us to accept religion? In other words the deficiency involves being rational. There are groups of religious people in countries where you get killed for believing in a different god, and if that's all we're missing out on, then good ridden to religion. Warning; the video involves graphic violence. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hZj_8nC ... g&index=18


I don't think evidence of neurodiversity is enough to convince me. In an above post I covered how differences in the brain aren't enough to suggest developmental disability by itself. Sad people might have a lack of endorphin and happy people might have excessive endorphin, but qualifying either for disorders is just silly. Disclaimer: I have read the webpages of the links you gave me didn't leave empty handed.


We don't settle for it, but others sure will. While we're still waiting decades later for the cause and cure of autism to be discovered, cancer will already be finished.


I don't think Einstein had autism either. Autopsy revealed his brain had no parietal operculum on either side, and the inferior parietal lobe(mathematical thought, visuospatial cognition, and imagery of movement) was 15% large than average; (and to anyone viewing this post)autism is irrelevant in explaining Einstein. I'd also have to say university professors evidently aren't influenced by neurological impairments despite some being diagnosed with a disorder(AS) implying they do have a neurological impairment.


By that I of course meant the "NTs". Put in quotes because neurotypical organisms of species don't necessarily benefit the evolution of their species and eventually fall into obscurity anyways.


I agree that the diagnosis of Asperger's is only given to smart people. At first it was just a hunch, then I met others in real life diagnosed with it, and now it's clear my hunch was correct. I'll add; I presume intelligence strongly influences voice patterns.

Mental disorder-a psychological or behavioral pattern associated with distress or disability that occurs in an individual and is not a part of normal development or culture.

Personality disorder-an enduring pattern of inner experience and behavior that deviates markedly from the expectations of the culture of the individual who exhibits it.

You defined Aspergers/Autism as a disorder without knowing it: "Maybe its just a set of disabling symptoms which statisically are bound to occur together in a small subset of the population."-This is a disorder!

Again, I think you are attacking a label. When the europeans came to America they "labeled" the natives "Indians". Later they were more correctly referred to as Native Americans, but amongst themselves they had their own labels: Cherokee, Navajo, Apache, etc.


The NT's are the "Europeans" and Autistics are the "Native Americans"; the description of "Autism" may (will) change and the "why" will emerge, but the symptoms and the people experiencing those symptoms are very real.

A better correlation for the Quargs would be a group of people that can all climb and crawl, but the Quargs do it differently, and internally it is painful for the Quargs to coexist with the others. Furthermore, these Quargs may not like to "Socialize" because they are too busy thinking and inventing things that the others will eventually socialize about.

Understanding can only come from misunderstanding; without a question there is no answer; a theory births a fact.

I am not in disagreement with your open minded thinking, however I think you may be having trouble expressing your intentions possibly due to the Aspergers that you don't have because it does not exist.

a. Intelligent people tend to have better educations.
b. Well-educated people are less likely to rely on faith.
: : Intelligent people are less likely to be "religious".


People with Autism Spectrum Disorders (of which Asperger's Syndrome is a narrowly-defined behavior set ) are no more or less intelligent - on the average - than neurotypicals. This is where your thesis breaks down.


... not if it is based upon erroneous assumptions, which your thesis is.

Your thesis is not scientific. It is not even a theory.


You might want to consider selling your back-peddling act to the circus.

MoonCanvas,, I find you to be highly insulting to my intelligence, no matter that you're trying to scrape yourself out of a mess by saying that you're not implying that we're all dumb. Don't even try the disclaimer bit.

Anecdotal reasoning is anecdotal.

Your response was off topic and didn't even make complete sense.


Exactly, I only implied most religious people are dumb. I already admitted it was just an opinion so you should probably get over it.


Feel free to join in on the conversation to debunk this anecdotal reasoning.

Last edited by MoonCanvas on 26 Jun 2013, 12:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

And the plural of "Anecdote" is not "Data".

The hilairious thing is this is such an aspie topic to make.

I love how this exploded into a 6 page affair, lmfao.

Yeah, autism is a thing. It's definitely a thing, more than just "personality traits". Yeah, autistics tend to have a set of personality traits but that's like saying dogs are fluffy because they have fur - yeah usually furry things are fluffy but they can also be shaggy or have coarse fur. And I'm not saying that because I want to secure a social security payment at the end of each month (because I don't) but because yeah it is a thing.

But yeah. Trolls will be trolls I guess.

I get that he came off in a very bad way; offending myself and most others, but let us all try to respond in a way that we wish all NT's would respond to us. I think most of us can relate to "coming off" in an unattended demeanor. I know I seem rude all the time when small talk quickly sends me down the pipe of useless boredom.

You mean, "Is Asperger's linked to ________________?", right?

It ranks right up there with, "Is/was <insert name of celebrity> an Aspie?"