Poll: Is Aspergers the same thing as ASD/HFA?

Post Reply New Topic

I understand the original differences that HFA had a slight speech delay and Aspergers no speech delay.Now they have a different system,the three level system,which at some point will also be revised.

I prefer idiot savant,it's stood the test of time with common sense.

It acknowledges the disability that the curebees want and acknowledges the strong point and intelligence that the ND's want.
Idiot savant works for everyone!

It’s unlikely these labels will last in the future.

It appears there are many different autism’s but the brain has a limited ability to express them causing the overlap of symptoms.

In the future maybe 30 years, all those disorders will be broken down into their relative genetic / biological faults with their own possible treatments.

Autism where possible will be treated in clusters of similarly effected individuals rather than looked at now as one disorder.

This is why there‘s a list as long as my arm on treatments that have a positive effect on some but not all those with ASD, from folinic acid to gluten free diet etc etc

One day they may even merge all organic brain disorders from birth calling it autism as more is known about the brain. In the same way they split neurotic / psychotic but then call it depression / bi polar etc...

Old medical terms:
http://www.disease.pricklytree.co.uk/

That's interesting because geometry and trig were relatively easy for me, algebra and calculus are painful (I aced trig after failing algebra 2 (I never took algebra 1, which probably had something to do with it). Algebra 2 was the prerequist for trig--go figure). I also most likely have dysgraphia and dyslexia as well--never diagnosed with either, but I have too much evidence to discount them.

Idiot savant is an old term that hasn't stood the test of time well (it arose in the late 1800s)...it was revised to "autistic savant" more recently, because idiot is so pejorative...the early view of the "idiot savant" was someone like an idiot/imbecile/ret*d (whatever you want to call it), with an extremely low IQ...who had at least one remarkable skill, far exceeding what you would find in a normal person, but absolutely no use for the ability and no way to function in the world...

It's estimated about 10% of autistic people have some savant abilities...and they're not all on the idiot/imbecile level of functioning. So the term, even revised as "autistic savant" just doesn't apply to the vast majority of autistic people. So if you're applying the label "idiot savant" to all autistic people, then 1 in 10 is going to have a savant aspect...making the rest merely..."idiots"? Doesn't seem quite right to me...autistic savant works fine, but only for a minority of autism cases.

Autistic savant works better for more people anyway, because it doesn't mean you have to be an "idiot" or even on the low functioning side, necessarily. There's an interesting book called Born on a Blue Day: Inside the Extraordinary Mind of an Autistic Savant by Daniel Tammet, a guy who was diagnosed with AS...but still can be considered an autistic savant because he is on the spectrum, and he has the savant abilities. Again though, not all autistic people should be expected to have these savant abilities. Compared to Kim Peek, he is much more functional and seems kind of like an ordinary guy (hence an AS diagnosis).

When I was working in mental health, I worked with a handful of people with autism...at least some of them did have savant abilities. One lady was blind and had photographic memory, calender calculation, etc., was highly verbal, intelligent, and communicative, and seemed high functioning, I suspect if she weren't blind she'd be able to do more. Another lady was...somewhat lower functioning and less verbal but knew the calendar as well...then there were a few others who didn't have any savant abilities. So it goes both ways.

I've also met some people online who are diagnosed autistic...I think mainly this is ASD under the new criteria which is more like AS (level 1 autism) who have savant abilities like prodigious memory etc. But yes I suspect it will change again over time.

Your splitting semantic hairs and arguing hyper-technicalities,irrelevant of pragmatic substance.

Idiot savant just isn't the right term at all for most autistic people. Not my fault if you can't see that.

No one wants to be called an idiot...and no one wants to be called a savant if they aren't a savant...and most of these people are neither of those things anyway!

So this is just an all around bad idea.

Last edited by eyelessshiver on 25 Aug 2020, 2:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I works for me

Yes, so use it then, but don't use it for others...because they aren't like you. It won't work for them. I'm wondering if you know anything much about autistic people at all, at this point...

Well,think what you want to think

Look man, it's just the truth. Why do you have such a hard time understanding this stuff? Yeah, I have a preference for thinking about things as truthfully as possible...you don't?

Only 10% of people with autism have savant abilities...so why would you call all of them a savant?

Similarly, why would you call them idiot, when it's an outdated derogatory word in the first place, furthermore not fitting lots of autistic people in the first place?

You just don't get it. You're wrong, dude.

Your super literalist, hyper-technical and ultra factual style arguments,prove my point better than I could

Your using a literal dictionary definition of the term as coined by John Langdon Down in 1958 (who is also the eponymous namesake of Down's Syndrome)

I'm using the term more colloquially.

Right...ok, well as long as you're not just denying that the literal definition doesn't work. As long as you can see it, there's no further point in arguing. It sounded to me like you were saying you wanted "idiot savant" to be used in the DSM or something, but apparently you're saying this is an alternative to be used, like you said, colloquially...I guess that's fine if it's not being used literally.

I would not want idiot savant in a new DSM VI or something,the whole point is that a lot of the stuff in the DSM V isn't always right.Doctor's have been getting it wrong since they wrongly used the term autism in the first place all because they thought what we now call autism was "early childhood schizophrenia" and autism was a term associated with schizophrenia.
Then the DSM IV had Aspergers,PDD-NOS and non verbal learning disabilities and classic autism.
Now the DSM V merged it all together in a 3 level Autism Spectrum Disorder.
Who knows what doctors will come up with next,another crackpot theory on "autism" which isn't really even autism anyway,because it was named autism by mistake if we remember history.Eugene Bleuler coined the term for severe adult schizophrenics.

I don't take the doctor's to seriously,there definitely exists pervasive developmental disabilities and idiot savant personalities.But by idiot savant I mean sharp contrasts in a persons strong points and deficits,which most people who are autistic have,unlike neurotypicals who have more in the middle personalities.An idiot savant doesn't have to be a person with an IQ OF 73 but can memorize a bus schedule,it could be more subtle than that,more complex than that.And I think Langdon Down would agree,that was 1958,this is 2020.

Look how wrong doctor's were about autism 30 years ago,in 30 to 50 years we will likely think the DSM V is pretty silly,it's a work in progress.

I'm in agreement with you here. Things change relatively quickly, and people aren't stereotypes. I don't think we're really of too different opinions on these matters in light of some explanation.

I think we both agree it's best to keep an open mind and see where things go.It's good to agree on WP for a change LOL

I think someone who has the word "savant" in his username is not likely to back down from wanting to use that word. Nice to see people working through a disagreement civilly.