What is autism?

Post Reply New Topic

I first got referred to this site when I asked /r/autism this question, and they decided to make it your problem instead. So, I'm just going to copy/paste what I wrote there into here.

I've been formally diagnosed with autism. The hospital that diagnosed me recommended that I do further research on my own, and didn't explain what it actually meant past "has trouble with social skills." And while there are a few weird symptoms (flapping, running in circle, pacing, or other ways of burning off inexplicable excess energy, for example), I have never had a satisfactory explanation of what exactly autism is, or even what it looks like. How does someone get diagnosed as being autistic? Just because they have difficulty making friends? So if a black kid is ostracized from his purely white peer group, he magically becomes autistic, even though he was fine earlier? Or is it because they have difficulty making friends in all peer groups, in which case I don't qualify and neither do most people diagnosed as autistic, because we've have found we can get on just fine with certain peer groups. Is it just people who are "weird," in which case isn't it basically just anti-nerd prejudice that's been institutionalized? Are "autistic" and "nerdy" literally synonymous, and the doctors just don't want to admit to something so unprofessional?
None of these explanations make much sense to me, particularly considering the ultimate conclusion is that autism simply isn't a thing...But those bizarre symptoms I mentioned earlier heavily suggest that yes, it is. Which leaves me completely mystified. What is autism? What, besides a piece of paper from a hospital saying I'm autistic, do I have in common with everyone else who's autistic, by definition of being autistic?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=signs+of+autism

As far as what you mentioned about the more social aspects go, I think that it has more to do with (at least initially) having difficulty making friends in a variety of peer groups. Going along your example, I think that the black kid you mentioned would also have to have problems interacting with other kinds of people, not just whites, in order to be considered "autistic."
Though the label is man-made, I think there is clearly a more "organic" side to autism that is not fully influenced by the social behaviors of humans in general. (Like the ostracizing: that is purely controlled by that group the kid didn't fit in with. It doesn't matter how much conscious control they have over their thoughts on "different" people. They're still the thoughts of those individuals, and they will most likely act on them appropriately. Example: either ostracized or included.)
If the black kid in question has difficulty making friends or fitting in with most any peer group, he would be more fit to a label of "autism" than if he were just judged based on his ability to fit in with a group of particularly judgmental white people who just so happened to be his peers.

Then what you have in common with the others with ASDs goes along the same lines, I think. Due to a combination of neurological wiring and other factors, people with autism just do not "click" as well, so to speak, with others. That symptom persists across the board to certain degrees, as do communication problems in general and repetitive interests/behaviors. The "weird symptoms" you described would fall under the repetitive interests/behaviors. Then the communication problems vary for each individual... every symptom does, really. I, for instance, can speak, but I have significant problems with "small talk" and body language... I have a diagnosis of Asperger's syndrome (which is thought to be a form of mild autism), not "autistic disorder", yet I'm still on the same "spectrum" as those with autistic disorder because those problems I just mentioned are still problems with communication, though they aren't as severe as some others (example: complete inability to speak.)

^^^ From this:

Surely autism isn't a Thing so much as a relative degree of Absence (of an expected Thing) - The expected Thing would be a mechanical processing of and response to sensory information at the normally-expected speed and quality. I say mechanical because however flamboyant, charismatic, or charming the result, concrete perceptions of the outside world are the only known means of grounding the personality of a living creature. I disagree with 'Theory of Mind' Theorists, because the existence of other minds can be subconsciously or (in our autistic case) consciously inferred by comparing sensory evidence with one's own experience of events such as smiling; I suspect that this process is simply slowed down in young and/or low-functioning autistics, so that the realisation that others have minds of their own may be delayed (depending on the individual's style of making sense of their environment) and in any case cannot on its own lead to knowledge of other minds - Direct knowledge of others' minds is ofcourse impossible unless by telepathy of some kind, but animals like us work out what's going on around them by comparing what they sense to an inner blueprint based on their own earlier actions, perceptions, and reactions. None of this is 'authored' by the individual in normal cases, but if we auties could feel our way through the outside world in the same way as others, we'd be a lot more socially and emotionally expressive, as well as fundamentally non-autistic.

So this, to me, is the difference between autistics and 'NTs'. If autism can be said to be anything, it must be the need to reach knowledge that is normally intuitive by rational means.

No. The white man has always had a lack of skin pigment. It's what makes us white.

Regardless, several months ago I read the wikipedia article on autism, and found it unsatisfying...But now I can't remember why. Curious.

This is my favorite explanation:

http://www.autistics.org/library/whatis.html

But nobody really knows what it is beyond neurological in basis and likely genetic.

Here's a simple way of understanding autism.

Think of the word "ret*d".

If someone calls an Aspie a "ret*d", that Aspie is likely to respond, "Mental retardation means that you have a low I.Q. I don't have a low I.Q., so I'm not a ret*d."

What that Aspie fails to understand is that colloquial use of the word "ret*d" isn't limited the way the clinical definition of mental retardation (or intellectual disability, as it's now called) is.

"ret*d", in the colloquial sense, is rich with connotations that go beyond I.Q. measures to encompass many aspects of human behavior, from poor socialization ability to obsessiveness, from attentional issues to cluelessness, from naivete to motor problems, from pedantry to hyperactivity.

When people say things like, "autism is just another word for ret*d", people are likely to respond as the aforementioned Aspie did--by pointing out that many autistic individuals are are intelligent, and therefore not "ret*d". The truth is, autism is just another word for "ret*d"--only not in the clinical sense, but the colloquial one.

autism is when you see the world for what it is, not for what it's meant to be seen as.

autism is when you see the world for what it is, not for what it's meant to be seen as[quote]

In my experience, the essence of autism is NOT seeing ANY world - for what it is or otherwise.

Here's a simple way of understanding autism.

Think of the word "ret*d".

I've never been called a 'ret*d', but maybe that's just cos I was raised in 80s&90s Britain rather than wherver/whenever u were brought up. Btw even if all autistics are ret*ds, not all ret*ds are autistic, surely!

No. The white man has always had a lack of skin pigment. It's what makes us white.

Regardless, several months ago I read the wikipedia article on autism, and found it unsatisfying...But now I can't remember why. Curious.
wavefreak58
PostPosted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 9:44 pm Post subject:
undefineable wrote:
Surely autism isn't a Thing so much as a relative degree of Absence (of an expected Thing) -


Seems an odd way of putting it. If a white missionary goes deep into the Amazon, will he no longer be white an instead be the absence of brown?
[quote]

It's simple - For us, I believe there's a mechanism missing to one degree or another - The developing brain simply 'selects Run in Safe Mode', in the same way that brown can be more or less a full combination of possible pigments or colours. There's a barrier to our full expression that no amount of tolerance or self-acceptance can take away.

autism is when you see the world for what it is, not for what it's meant to be seen as

In my experience, the essence of autism is NOT seeing ANY world - for what it is or otherwise.

Here's a simple way of understanding autism.

Think of the word "ret*d".

I've never been called a 'ret*d', but maybe that's just cos I was raised in 80s&90s Britain rather than wherver/whenever u were brought up. Btw even if all autistics are ret*ds, not all ret*ds are autistic, surely!

No. The white man has always had a lack of skin pigment. It's what makes us white.

Regardless, several months ago I read the wikipedia article on autism, and found it unsatisfying...But now I can't remember why. Curious.
wavefreak58
PostPosted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 9:44 pm Post subject:
undefineable wrote:
Surely autism isn't a Thing so much as a relative degree of Absence (of an expected Thing) -


Seems an odd way of putting it. If a white missionary goes deep into the Amazon, will he no longer be white an instead be the absence of brown?
[quote]

It's simple - For us, I believe there's a mechanism missing to one degree or another - The developing brain simply 'selects Run in Safe Mode', in the same way that brown can be more or less a full combination of possible pigments or colours. There's a barrier to our full expression that no amount of tolerance or self-acceptance can take away. Like one theory says, the different brain functions never seem to link together, and conscious awareness is left stranded in an unfocussed soup, clutching at the straws presented to it by potential obsessions.