I believe people here should read this website article :

Post Reply New Topic

http://tcftalk.com/clairefiles/index.ph ... 0.msg87112

I think many here might find it enlightening.

- Ray M -

Within the spectrum there is a spectrum, in how autism manifests in the individual and how one has learned to cope differs. Special needs depends on the person.

As for myself though, I've grown tired of the label.

Eh, I'd say this is pretty much the libertarian/objectivist view on it. Sort of their view on a lot of things; 'all mental illnesses are just problems you can get over if you try hard enough.' Well, I agree with half of that. All mental "illness" really are just 'problems'; problems that a lot of people have, making them group-able. That's fine, I call this same idea "personality," but you can't just "tsk-tsk" your problems or personality away (something many people seem to forget in some idealistic fashion). Sometimes dealing with things requires a "third man" to 'triangulate' where you are with respect to the rest of society, and that is basically the useful function I see coming from contemporary psychology. I dislike the negative connotations of a lot of what they say as well as the shallow and stereotypical image people form because of it. Nevertheless the additional perspective it gives me is more than beneficial enough to outweigh the annoyances.

Heh, modern psychiatry does have a pretty obnoxious view of Asperger Syndrome. Just because their input is interesting doesn't mean I agree with it. I have about as little respect for them as they do for me. Even so, I find psychiatry's "you're flawed and we want to try to help you (even though we don't really understand you)" view to be much preferable over the objectivist "you are flawed; you must not be trying hard enough, you ignorant drag on society" viewpoint.

Nothing like the internet for finding stupid opinions... Whoever wrote that is obviously completely uninformed about the subject, and it probably not very smart.

As with the OCD - I have to point out sometimes to people around me that it is called DISORDER for a reason and not obsessive compulsive party. Some of the stuff I OCD about is maybe not true OCD but rigid thinking or too much focus on detail or rule following - and some of it is not a big deal but some of it is not that much fun either. So in that regard I don't think it is just some psychiatrist "labeling" me. However - that does not mean that anyone should have permission to decide that I am not capable to make my own desicions regarding medication or anything like that. I guess it is called self-determination.

However - there are groups of people who may be "different" yet have no issues regarding that difference except what society enforces upon them. And when people are placed in artificial social environments like classrooms than they can get labeled for not being able to perform to an artificial standard. There is little allowance for uniqueness - and some kids get labeled ADHD for not being able to sit at a desk all day. And how are people who get hyper and distracted by being somewhere they don't want to be and doing something they don't want to do labeled either as a troublemaker or with some sort of disorder. That is why some on the spectrum say it is Aspergers Syndrome and refute the disorder part.

The rant seemed to be about things other than Asperger Syndrome alone. The whole idea of government-funded education projects - especially with additional resources being directed to those with the greatest need - seem to be the issues they were most concerned with.

Libertarian Objectivists tend to disdain the idea of a helping hand towards the most needy, especially if it is from Government.

I look forward to the day when I encounter that rare being - a long-term homeless and penniless Libertarian Objectivist.

Yeah its all to do with those evil psychologists nothing to do with a complete lack of investment from both parties of your government system into state education for several decades, social and economic stratification etc etc

Is this a "parents" website or something? There not terribly quick on the mark here i mean one of them is advocating that to best understand the condition you should read curious incident of the dog bollocks book for christ sake

I find his view somewhat ignorant. He himself does not have Asperger's. He does not comprehend what it is like to live with AS, and how it challenges those that actually do have it. I think that he does not realise that there is more to AS than the lack of social skills and perseverations. Or, perhaps, he does not understand the severity of our lack of social skills. On the whole, though, I think that he is just passing judgement on something he does not fully understand.

I think you greatly misunderstand objectivism. Ever actually read any Ayn Rand? The heroes of her stories all have a lot of aspie traits. Although I do realize that a lot of objectivist don't even understand the foundation of their own philosophy and end up just being jerks.

I TOTALLY agree with that...

Thank you for posting this article. I know I relate to some of his points, like this one:

<<So, people can't have different personalities anymore? Anybody who's introverted and <<technically brilliant now has a disorder? What's wrong with being a geek?
<<
<<Even more disturbing is the fact that the most talented and productive members of a <<technological society are being labelled as deviant. Wouldn't "geek" apply to Thomas <<Edison, Nikola Tesla, Albert Einstein, or Bill Gates, men whose technical achievements <<changed the world? So, if you have people who can't be dumbed down, the psychological <<establishment considers them mentally ill. To me this smacks of the Soviet tactic of <<putting dissidents in mental institutions.
<<
<<And, what the hell is going on when intellect and achievement are considered a disorder? <<Back when I attended government school, scientists and inventors like Edison, Einstein, <<and Alexander Graham Bell were considered heroes and role models. I wonder, are they <<now portrayed as unfortunate victims of Asperger's Syndrome, but nobody knew that <<back then, so, without treatment, they were condemned to a lifetime of making <<discoveries?

I don't think in this particular section, he was trying to slam people with Aspergers, what I think he was trying to say is anyone who doesn't conform or is extremely bright instead of being recognized and praised for their uniqueness and their special abilities, they are condemned not only by their peers, but by the school that is supposed to educate them.

<<Why do the shrinks consider the "socialization" crap to be more important than anything <<else? Why aren't the football players, cheerleaders, prom queens, and frat boys <<considered deviant? Who makes these rules?

Why can't person socialize to the extent they are comfortable with? That was another problem school officials had with me, they thought I didn't socialize enough. In fact, I got hassled in 8th grade and high school because I had no interest in ball games, dances, and the like. The fact I also didn't want to date was also an issue with them. Why can't those things be left up to the individual to decide? Who are these people to decide if I have my own interests there is something wrong with me that needs to be fixed?

Why can't someone have their own activities? Why do they have to be "school" activities. I think a student can have just as full and happy of a life doing their own activities as another can have doing school activities. Of course, it is my controversial opinion that if it doesn't involve Reading, Writing, and Arithmetic, it's none of the school's business!

I've never understood what was so great about football players, prom queens, etc. I thought they school's first duty(and should be ONLY duty) was academic instruction. If that is the case, shouldn't the students who do well academically be placed on a pedastal, while these others basically get just a passing mention? American schools definitely have it backwards.

<<So here's another reason to homeschool, so your children won't get these bogus <<diagnoses.

I agree with this statement because what I experienced was experienced mostly in private schools. I only went to public school 1 year out of 12, and experienced the same crap in both kinds of schools.

<<But, in the population that does go to the government schools, how many future <<Shakespeares, Einsteins, and Edisons will be lost, their brilliance drugged or "counselled" <<out of them?

Even one is too many, but the government schools aren't the only guilty ones here, private schools do it too!

I do agree with his Soviet analogy, how if children in school don't fit a "norm" decided upon by someone else with their own agenda, they have something wrong with them and must be corrected. I experienced too much of that in my life and it needs to stop.

However if you read the comments after the post most are not that complimentary to those who have AS and a couple were mocking of AS with the same garbage that people are using it is an excuse or to get disability. The author of the post even questions the validity of such a thing as AS. What seemingly starts out as a post about diversity and uniqueness turns around and belittles those who have difficulties. If Bill Gates is on the spectrum (which is entirely speculation) that is not the same as saying everyone with AS is going to be like Bill Gates or Edison or Einstein.

What I liked about the main article was the fact that it touched on a view that should be central to a social construct; that is, why should anyone care what is different about I or the next person? After all, we're all human, and we all have differences, some are more so than others, etc... I sort of liked the fact that was mentioned regarding an idea representing people whom are intellects as being ridiculed, because they don't fit into the larger social scheme of things, which is completely artificial. If we start doing away with people like us, then we no longer will have those intellectually-gifted people. I seriously doubt if the person writing that article would support genetic engineering of children to make sure they aren't autistic and so forth. Acknowledging that we have autism or AS opens very dangerous doors, I must say, given the nature of our current establishments. In many cases, we're not really aided in terms of living a better life, but we're ridiculed and contolled through medication, behavioral therapies, genetic research, etc... It can all be very dangerous, especially if they start weeding out people whom they might suspect of having AS. I see a future in which many children will end up being diagnosed with AS whom don't even have it, much like the ADHD charade of the 1980s, and are going to be thrust into therapies and other similar programs that they do not even need at all. There are cases of a wide range of students having been claimed to have had ADHD by school officials, because they appeared a little active or video games had a tendency to decrease their attention spans, who probably did not even have ADHD, yet they were put on Ritalin and were said to be a problem, thus some were held back and thrust into specialized classes. This hurts people who really do need help, and for those of us that do, the therapies some of us are confronted with are destructive in the long run.

I also posted this article because many people with AS claim to be libertarian, yet many libertarians I have come across seem to have a very similar belief pattern. From what I read, I could question the concept of libertarianism of many. And I don't believe Ayn Rand, for example, to be a libertarian, because she probably supports slave labor, e.g. "laissez-faire capitalism."

- Ray M -

most of the posters on there seemed to me to be shallow minded fools. the link to the programmers stone article made it worth reading, some interesting ideas in there...

I think that is going on because on some of the parenting groups there will be lengthy posts from parents about their kids who do not appear to be having any sort of disorder - except for "lack of wanting to herd disorder". The kids do not have any issues on their own but what is put upon them by the artificial environment of the classroom - and I have seen some posts where kids who in other days would have been seen as just being defiant (and coincidently intelligent) are being labeled as having AS. It IS entirely possible to be intelligent and NOT have AS or to be geeky and not have AS. SO in that regard I question some of the numbers that the autsim groups use in claiming that autism is greatly on the rise. It may be on the rise for a variety of reasons but those 1 in 166 (or even as low as 1 in 70 according to a mercury group) numbers are including those on the spectrum who may be considered AS and not nearly affected - if at all - the the AS.

Aye.