In search of a truce in the autism wars • Hacker News Board

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#21

Post by cc81 » Thu, May 02, 2019, 8:54 PM UTC

nicoburns wrote: post #3

DiseasedBadger wrote: post #2

There is no genuine debate to be had. No one who has the ability to not be autistic, would choose to be. This is yet another example of how our toxic modern culture turns everything into an "identity". Some people are less healthy than others. That's potentially sad, potentially not a big deal. Neither way is there any excuse for this faketroversy.

This depends a lot on the severity of the condition... I have autistic traits, and although they do cause me some problems, they also give me advantages (an excellent career in software development due to unusually good logical thinking for example). I'm not convinced that I would choose to be otherwise.

A lot of people have excellent careers within software development without those traits though and it is possible that you would have an equally as good career without autistic traits.

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#22

Post by DiseasedBadger » Thu, May 02, 2019, 8:58 PM UTC

DiseasedBadger wrote: post #2

There is no genuine debate to be had. No one who has the ability to not be autistic, would choose to be. This is yet another example of how our toxic modern culture turns everything into an "identity". Some people are less healthy than others. That's potentially sad, potentially not a big deal. Neither way is there any excuse for this faketroversy.

I don't know if it's kosher to respond to one's own comment, but I didn't see an option to edit. So I'll just say this:

I choose that phrasing for a reason. Because I know that some people choose beliefs based on how hurtful an idea might be, not on it's logical merits.

There is no link between how a person irreparably in a given situation, describes that situation, and how anyone not in it, regards it. Almost every comment fails that most basic understanding. That is my point.

There is no real debate. Only a lot of modern people without the fortitude to realistically consider unpleasant things. Feels before reals, indeed.

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#23

Post by [deleted] » Thu, May 02, 2019, 9:00 PM UTC

dooglius wrote: post #9

DiseasedBadger wrote: post #2

There is no genuine debate to be had. No one who has the ability to not be autistic, would choose to be. This is yet another example of how our toxic modern culture turns everything into an "identity". Some people are less healthy than others. That's potentially sad, potentially not a big deal. Neither way is there any excuse for this faketroversy.

I agree with your general point, but there are very clearly people who would choose to remain autistic, given the opportunity.

[deleted]

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#24

Post by 0815test » Thu, May 02, 2019, 9:01 PM UTC

watwut wrote: post #18

PaulHoule wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that severely autistic people have an emotional life as real as anyone else, probably more empathy than they are able to express, but neurotypicals have a hard time having empathy for them. Thus i think the puppet is insulting to severe autists as well as less severe autists. It is typical neurological thinking to see somebody different as less than human.

One problem is that the lack of ability to express empathy oftentimes come across as cruelty. Not always, but quite often.

Well, there are quite a few people who lack empathy to such an extreme extent as to be quite cruel to others. We all want to avoid these people, so we expect those we interact with to express strong empathy-signals, and distrust them if they won't. It's absolutely normal for autists to be inconvenienced by this, since - their empathy-ceilings being lower, as a rule - they have to pay a higher personal cost than most to send these reliable signals. But this is not in principle different from any other problem that may be experienced due to having autistic traits. It's surely better than the alternative of being distrusted, or else of enabling cruel abusers.

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#25

Post by SubiculumCode » Thu, May 02, 2019, 9:03 PM UTC

Writing from the awards ceremony ballroom at INSAR, I just want to say that this was a beautiful article that perfectly captured my own thoughts on the matter as an ASD researcher.

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#26

Post by geofft » Thu, May 02, 2019, 9:05 PM UTC

DiseasedBadger wrote: post #22

DiseasedBadger wrote: post #2

There is no genuine debate to be had. No one who has the ability to not be autistic, would choose to be. This is yet another example of how our toxic modern culture turns everything into an "identity". Some people are less healthy than others. That's potentially sad, potentially not a big deal. Neither way is there any excuse for this faketroversy.

I don't know if it's kosher to respond to one's own comment, but I didn't see an option to edit. So I'll just say this: I choose that phrasing for a reason. Because I know that some people choose beliefs based on how hurtful an idea might be, not on it's logical merits. There is no link between how a person irreparably in a given situation, describes that situation, and how anyone not in it, regards it. Almost every…

You are refusing to consider "reals"—people telling you that no, you're factually wrong—because you cannot conceive of holding a certain opinion and therefore your "feels" have you convinced that nobody holds it either. Facts don't care about your feelings, and you'd be well advised to gather some facts.

Your phrasing was quite confusing: it could mean either that no one who is autistic would choose to remain autistic if they had the option of choosing to not (which has been debunked) or that no one who is not autistic would choose to become autistic if they had that option. The second may or may not be true, but what does it prove? I'm not white. I don't think I'd choose to become white if I had the option, because I wouldn't be me any more, and that's valuable to me. Does that mean I think being white is inferior in any way? Certainly not! It just means that people generally wish to remain themselves, and that doesn't prove your point; in fact, it argues against it.

As someone not autistic, I look at people with autism and I say, oh, you have autism. They look at me and say, oh, you have food allergies. That's it. Sure, both are medical conditions, but I don't find a need to pity them for their medical condition any more than they find a need to pity me for mine and talk about how they wouldn't want to have allergies and how surely I must wish to stop having allergies.

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#27

Post by umvi » Thu, May 02, 2019, 9:08 PM UTC

gjm11 wrote: post #7

DiseasedBadger wrote: post #2

There is no genuine debate to be had. No one who has the ability to not be autistic, would choose to be. This is yet another example of how our toxic modern culture turns everything into an "identity". Some people are less healthy than others. That's potentially sad, potentially not a big deal. Neither way is there any excuse for this faketroversy.

It's completely untrue that "no one who has the ability to not be autistic, would choose to be"; plenty of autistic people are happy to be the way they are and would not want to change. (Pedantic note 1: If you're super-duper-literal about what you said, and take it to refer only to people who actually have the ability not to autistic, rather than speculating on what would happen if autistic people had the ability no…

> plenty of autistic people are happy to be the way they are and would not want to change.

How can you objectively claim to prefer autism over non-autism if you've never experienced the latter?

It's like me being completely content with my mechanical Ford Mustang and refusing to switch to a computerized car on the grounds that I'm happy with my Mustang and it's impossible for me to imagine what driving a computerized car could be like. I've never tried a computerized car that has lane assist and anti-lock brakes, mind you, but I'm just afraid I would like it less than my trusty old Mustang I've used my whole life.

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#28

Post by geofft » Thu, May 02, 2019, 9:08 PM UTC

DiseasedBadger wrote: post #20

ausbah wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>No one who has the ability to not be autistic, would choose to be. How do you know that? You aren't an autistic person, what gives you the right to suddenly speak for autistic people? >This is yet another example of how our toxic modern culture turns everything into an "identity". Google literally defines identity as "the fact of being who or what a person or thing is". Ergo a person with autism can have autism as a…

You're perspective is flawed. You can't assume everyone is equally able to speak for themselves. One might not speak ill of a tyrant one has no prospects of escaping.

That's generally because one fears retribution from a tyrant. Autism is not a tyrant and has neither desire nor means of retribution, so your argument makes no sense. You're just grasping at explanations to dismiss arguments that make you unhappy.

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#29

Post by fwip » Thu, May 02, 2019, 9:08 PM UTC

umvi wrote: post #27

gjm11 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's completely untrue that "no one who has the ability to not be autistic, would choose to be"; plenty of autistic people are happy to be the way they are and would not want to change. (Pedantic note 1: If you're super-duper-literal about what you said, and take it to refer only to people who actually have the ability not to autistic, rather than speculating on what would happen if autistic people had the ability no…

> plenty of autistic people are happy to be the way they are and would not want to change. How can you objectively claim to prefer autism over non-autism if you've never experienced the latter? It's like me being completely content with my mechanical Ford Mustang and refusing to switch to a computerized car on the grounds that I'm happy with my Mustang and it's impossible for me to imagine what driving a computerized…

How can you objectively claim to prefer non-autism over autism?

Re: In search of a truce in the autism wars

#30

Post by _Microft » Thu, May 02, 2019, 9:09 PM UTC

There's an observation I made a while ago: pretty much all people that I heard stating that they are "on the spectrum" were americans.

Why is that? I never checked but I would be surprised if the prevalence is higher than in other western countries. So what is it? Is it better diagnosed or just wrong (wrong diagnosis, self-diagnosis, pidgeonholing bc it's cool to be non-average,...), or maybe there is an issue that people in Europe wouldn't admit that they are on the spectrum and the prevalence is actually on the same level as in the US?