Fantastic Article about Autism and Astrology!

Post Reply New Topic

I found this astrologer's p.o.v about the rise in Autism to be quite intriguing:

The recent death of John Travolta's son Jett has brought the discussion of autism back into the news. It has long been rumored that Jett was autistic and John Travolta's brother Joey, founder of the organization Actors for Autism, had long argued the case. However, autism is not recognized by the Church of Scientology of which the Travoltas are members, so Jett was never tested for autism and therefore not diagnosed and treated.

I am certainly sympathetic to the Travolta's desire to keep their child free of psychiatric drugs, and I have long believed that the autism phenomenon, rather than a disorder to be treated, marks a significant shift in genetic patterning of the human race. The statistics are staggering: 1 in 150 American children are now diagnosed to be somewhere on the autism spectrum. (more)
http://blog.beliefnet.com/astrologicalm ... onnec.html

I barely know anything about astrology but that was an interesting read.

Astrology is nonsense.

Too bad most aspies are too logical to believe in astrology...

Yeah, but so is non-locality.

Whether astrology is logical or no, there are alot of people out there looking for answers to spiritual things--and answers about autism. From articles like these it's possible to glean bits of information about public perception of the spectrum.Besides the usual consider the source,speculating who the audience might be etc, here's what I've gathered from it:

*there are some elements of truth-

*there is also a lot of um..."interesting" aspects to it as well-

* there is a much more positive attitude about people on the spectrum than I've seen in many more scientific articles-

Anyway,for what it's worth there may be something useful there even if one doesn't ascribe to astrology.

Raise your hand if you were born around that time.
*Raises hand*

You echo my sentiments, exactly. While I don't profess to "believe" in astrology, what stood out here was a more open minded and sympathetic attitude towards those of us on the spectrum. I would rather that, than still another article from the curbies. And, I have read posts from others on WP, speculating about what the current trend of rising autism rates, could mean in the genetic evolution of mankind.

From a purely scientific perspective there's kind of a problem with describing anything as "the next step" in the evolution of anything really... There are a couple of reasons for this, but the biggest issue is that evolution is non-linear. There are essentially evolutionary differences between caucasians, asians and africans. So which of them is the "next step"? You can't really answer that question without resorting to racism -- but -- it doesn't really matter anyway, because evolutionary trends in all of these populations have occurred concurrently. One trend may have started before another, but the timeline for the trends overlap.

But even when evolution results in a new species that receives its own genus, there's no guarantee that other species won't evolve from the same ancestor, and the further you follow the chain back toward the beginning of life on earth actually the more likely it is that multiple species will have evolved from a single common ancestor. It may be much less likely that multiple species will result from the evolution of humans, but that doesn't make it impossible.

And finally that barring explanations of a spiritual nature (like astrology or religion), the causal relationship for evolution is the reverse of a relationship that would imply a "next step"... i.e. that the phrase "next step" implies "intelligent design" by way of there being a plan to take that next step. Scientists largely disagree that this is the case and maintain instead that what happens with evolution is the reverse, that there is no plan, just a lot of random "meandering" mutations, some of which survive (if they're "fit") while others don't. It's possible that in the past autistics might not have survived as often as a result of less forgiving physical environments (i.e. lack of modern technology) and so this mutation which was previously "not fit" for survival is now able to survive due to the comforts of modern life.

This is of course all from a purely scientific perspective on evolution theory.

One huge problem with this article is the assumption that the numbers of AS are growing.

I think that it is changes in society which have made more and more AS visible by disabling us with increased noise, chemicals, speed/time-pressures, multi-tasking in many jobs, high rate of change in most areas of life, less security/stability in careers, and far more social and business contact with strangers, etc etc etc.

However that does not invalidate any astrological correspondences drawn. After all the oppositions, conjunctions, etc, could be reflecting just such a change and the increasing visibility/disability of AS in our society as a result.

.

Articles like this are what makes the general public believe ASDs are just made up to get attention or excuses for undisciplined children.

I don't know about Aspies being too logical for astrology. It can be a special interest and those defy logic, no?

huh? no

How so?

I liked that article, even though I don't believe in astrology.

I agree that there isn't any "rise" in AS. It's just the way things are viewed, in our increased ability to access news from around the world. I have always found it annoying that autism and AS are being cited as a mysterious epidemic of some kind.

QFT


I feel that astrology can serve a sort of barometer of current trends in society.

This is interesting. I have thought about posting a thread on this general topic for some time. I know that, in my case, I have no water signs anywhere in my chart (water signs tend to be more emotive than rational). Neptune and Uranus are also prominent in my chart.