Re: Axis 5 - any meaning to this?

April 3, 2006

Leif, are you saying that their are very few people that are

somewhere between AS and NT? I have met many people that I would

concider somewhere in between the two groups, including my husband

and daughter as well as many friends I have or have had in the

past. Some of these are people that are fairly strong in certain

aspie traits, but do not have enough of the aspie traits to get a

dx. Other have the overall aspie traits, but strong nearly as

strong as most aspies.

It is strange that when I bring this up I don't seem to get a lot of

people saying that they too know people who are in this in-between

group. Perhaps they are really rare. But if they are so rare, why

is it that I know so many people in this category?

Or it could be that I am misinterpreting what Leif is saying.

Even if aspies are genetically different, their would still be a

mixing of genes if a child had one parent on the specturm and one

who was not. If a child has parents of two different ethnic groups,

the child may resemble one group for more than the other, or they

may be more interested in the culture of one side than the other,

but the child is still a mix of both groups. Would we not

have " multiracial " people that are an AS/NT mix?

Ilah

>

> :

> > I do not believe there is a " we " when referring to

> > people with A.S.D's. It only becomes how it is

> > " we " are viewed when diagnostics create the

> > socio-pathological conditions to create the

> > conditions by which others come together.

>

> In that case there is no g-factor, no temperamental

> groups and no learning style differences either.

> All these have been identified with the same methods

> I've used to identify autistic and NT domains.

>

> > " we " can be applied to a group or a following of

> > similar ideological idealisms, however in totality

> > there is no " we " feasible. There are so many

> > differences, despite the few similarities when viewed

realistically.

>

> Of course there are many differences. The thing is that

> a majority of human variation clusters to either Aspie domain

> or NT domain. The remaining diversity is so small as to

> describe it as almost non-existant. We would almost

> be genetic clones if the Aspie domain didn't exist.

>

> Leif

>

April 3, 2006

Leif, are you saying that their are very few people that are

somewhere between AS and NT? I have met many people that I would

concider somewhere in between the two groups, including my husband

and daughter as well as many friends I have or have had in the

past. Some of these are people that are fairly strong in certain

aspie traits, but do not have enough of the aspie traits to get a

dx. Other have the overall aspie traits, but strong nearly as

strong as most aspies.

It is strange that when I bring this up I don't seem to get a lot of

people saying that they too know people who are in this in-between

group. Perhaps they are really rare. But if they are so rare, why

is it that I know so many people in this category?

Or it could be that I am misinterpreting what Leif is saying.

Even if aspies are genetically different, their would still be a

mixing of genes if a child had one parent on the specturm and one

who was not. If a child has parents of two different ethnic groups,

the child may resemble one group for more than the other, or they

may be more interested in the culture of one side than the other,

but the child is still a mix of both groups. Would we not

have " multiracial " people that are an AS/NT mix?

Ilah

>

> :

> > I do not believe there is a " we " when referring to

> > people with A.S.D's. It only becomes how it is

> > " we " are viewed when diagnostics create the

> > socio-pathological conditions to create the

> > conditions by which others come together.

>

> In that case there is no g-factor, no temperamental

> groups and no learning style differences either.

> All these have been identified with the same methods

> I've used to identify autistic and NT domains.

>

> > " we " can be applied to a group or a following of

> > similar ideological idealisms, however in totality

> > there is no " we " feasible. There are so many

> > differences, despite the few similarities when viewed

realistically.

>

> Of course there are many differences. The thing is that

> a majority of human variation clusters to either Aspie domain

> or NT domain. The remaining diversity is so small as to

> describe it as almost non-existant. We would almost

> be genetic clones if the Aspie domain didn't exist.

>

> Leif

>

April 3, 2006

Your justifying delusions of a complex belief system that is highly abnormal. It's wasting my time spending an hour or so explaining it again, I have in the past.Be yourself not the label... you and I are completly different, yet I have H.F.A according to symtomotology, I don't care either, I am me.Leif Ekblad <leif@...> wrote: : > Autistic is just a trait of symptoms, they all think differently and > they are not a species and neither are people without a form of autism. How do you know? Can you prove that autistics are not a species, and that the species of NT doesn't exist? I think I can prove my point that autistics and NTs are indeed separate species. I haven't got it published yet, so it isn't considered as real yet, but I will. > There is no true

aspie, that's a label that was made up, and then > taken too seriously, serious enough to apply to an identity. There is a personality-type that matches Aspie to 80-90%, and it is real alright. It also spans the entire spectrum of human variation from sexual traits, social traits, behavior preferences, disease predispositions and even physical traits. > All blind people are blind, that's a fact. All people with a form of > autism are not as directly similar, nor even close to that by > comparison to a blind person not seeing. Bad comparision. If you can survey blind people and make them cluster on various traits, apart from being blind, I'll accept your analogy. > There are humans, not N.T's and Aspies. No, humans are comprised of Aspies and NTs. I can accept Ingers suggestion that we agree to disagree. However, I will not change my mind unless somebody could

present evidences that I'm wrong. That will take quite a bit of work since I've worked on this for several years by now. Leif New Songhttp://www.aspergershosting.com/audio/Onwah.wma

Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Messenger with Voice.

April 3, 2006

total blindness.. Was the direct factual comparision. Kathy <rrabbits@...> wrote: Just a little bit of information, blind people have varying degrees of blindness. My former neighbor was blind. His blindness was due to a problem where his retina bled and his vision was impaired by floating clots in the eyes. His condition was not the same as another person I met who had retina pigmentosa where the sight was lost gradually till she could not see unless something was about 1 to 2 inches from her eye. Still other people are blind due to problems with the nerve communication to the brain. Some blind people can tell that there are blurs of color but not see details. Others can intermittently see small pieces of their surroundings but not enough to

safely drive a car or consistently rely on to read. I'm reserving comments on the rest of your topic because I don't feel I know enough to take a stand at this point. Just wanted to let you know that your assumption about blind people needs looking at again. On 4/2/06, nathaninfortuna <nathaninfortuna@...> wrote: > All blind people are blind, that's a fact. All people with a form of > autism are not as directly similar, nor even close to that by > comparison to a blind person not seeing. New Songhttp://www.aspergershosting.com/audio/Onwah.wma

New Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.

April 3, 2006

total blindness.. Was the direct factual comparision. Kathy <rrabbits@...> wrote: Just a little bit of information, blind people have varying degrees of blindness. My former neighbor was blind. His blindness was due to a problem where his retina bled and his vision was impaired by floating clots in the eyes. His condition was not the same as another person I met who had retina pigmentosa where the sight was lost gradually till she could not see unless something was about 1 to 2 inches from her eye. Still other people are blind due to problems with the nerve communication to the brain. Some blind people can tell that there are blurs of color but not see details. Others can intermittently see small pieces of their surroundings but not enough to

safely drive a car or consistently rely on to read. I'm reserving comments on the rest of your topic because I don't feel I know enough to take a stand at this point. Just wanted to let you know that your assumption about blind people needs looking at again. On 4/2/06, nathaninfortuna <nathaninfortuna@...> wrote: > All blind people are blind, that's a fact. All people with a form of > autism are not as directly similar, nor even close to that by > comparison to a blind person not seeing. New Songhttp://www.aspergershosting.com/audio/Onwah.wma

New Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.

April 3, 2006

There is no totally A.S, it is just symtoms not the person.People have been ingrained into this idealogy that is near cult-like to fit in. Its not a false comparision, you dislike what I have to say, blind is blind A.S is symtoms just like so, people are not the label, each have there own personality that is unique.People have even gone as far as saying online someone is not an aspie becuase he or she is this or that way or imply that aspie is this way or that way when in fact they are dead wrong.I suppose it's part of either mind blindness or darn ignorance, either that or making it up as they go.Kathy <rrabbits@...> wrote: Then you are using a false comparison. You should also limit the other group to those totally AS. Kathy J. On 4/2/06, Young

<nathaninfortuna@...> wrote: > total blindness.. Was the direct factual comparision. > > Kathy <rrabbits@...> wrote: Just a little bit of > information, blind people have varying degrees of > blindness. New Songhttp://www.aspergershosting.com/audio/Onwah.wma

Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.

April 3, 2006

Talk to a few blind people and you might learn something new.

April 3, 2006

It has little to do with blind people... I have no interest in talking

to anyone specific, unless it's a girl around my age that's nice. I

wouldnt care if she was blind either.

>

> Talk to a few blind people and you might learn something new.

>

April 3, 2006

Well, like I said on your main topic I am still forming an opinion.

You assumed I didn't like what you said. I was and am only commenting

on your assumptions about blind people and really haven't formed a

strong opinion on the NT AS issue. I am frankly not too interested in

it because I am what I am and my son is what he is and the things we

can change we will choose how we want to grow/develop and the things

we can't change we will cope with, learn to enjoy, or ignore and go on

with our lives. The semantics stuff doesn't draw my interest too

much. I am the same way about memorizing 'important dates' in

history. :-)

On 4/2/06, nathaninfortuna <nathaninfortuna@...> wrote:

> It has little to do with blind people... I have no interest in talking

> to anyone specific, unless it's a girl around my age that's nice. I

> wouldnt care if she was blind either.

>

> >

> > Talk to a few blind people and you might learn something new.

> >

>

> FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship, support and

> acceptance. Everyone is valued.

>

> Check the Links section for more FAM forums.

>

April 3, 2006

To me a blind person is blind, cannot see, if they can see partly then

it's a matter of legalities.

> > >

> > > Talk to a few blind people and you might learn something new.

> > >

> >

> > FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship,

support and

> > acceptance. Everyone is valued.

> >

> > Check the Links section for more FAM forums.

> >

April 3, 2006

Ilah:

> Leif, are you saying that their are very few people that are

> somewhere between AS and NT?

No, I'm not saying that. I only say there is one set of traits

that are Aspie and another that is NT. Their actual distribution

in individuals is something else.

> I have met many people that I would

> concider somewhere in between the two groups, including my husband

> and daughter as well as many friends I have or have had in the

> past. Some of these are people that are fairly strong in certain

> aspie traits, but do not have enough of the aspie traits to get a

> dx. Other have the overall aspie traits, but strong nearly as

> strong as most aspies.

I agree. This is my observation as well. I've always claimed

there is no easy or convinient way to separate Aspies from

NTs, but that doesn't mean the *traits* themselves cannot

be meaningfully characterized in a Aspie and NT context.

IOW, I'm arguing mostly for individual traits, and not people.

Leif

April 3, 2006

When you have a PHD is when I will listen to you with your obscure theories. Though people with advanced degrees have been known to be insane, humans! New Songhttp://www.aspergershosting.com/audio/Onwah.wma

New Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.

April 3, 2006

:

> When you have a PHD is when I will listen to you with your obscure

theories.

Titles like PhDs are not connected with reliability of theories. Just look

at the flood of obscure theories in the autism area that has passed by.

Refrigirator mother, " extreme maleness " , brain damage, toxin damage,

vaccinations, mirror neurons and hundreds of others. Most of the originators

of these theories have academic titles, but does that help when they have no

inside knowledge? Nope, not a bit.

It is a pity that " blank slaters " , like you obviously are, does not listen

to reason, but instead present objections based on personal beliefs.

I see no reason to continue this debate with you unless you can

present consistent, scientific objections against my ideas. Your

view of the world obviously has nothing to do with the validity

of any theory.

Leif

April 3, 2006

Hi Leif,

His views are based more on the idea that compartamentalizing a

population is dangerous. Once people begin to associate themselves

with a " class " the separation is complete and they begin pointing

fingers at each other, judging another's behavior as " wrong " and so

on.

From a purely non-scientific perspective, I see the Aspie Quiz more

as a way to isolate symptoms of AS in people but no more than that.

While you can draw a coclusion and day " All people with these traits

have AS " that would be erroneous, because the fact is, many people

with those traits have AS and some people with those traits don't

have AS. When the test can successfully distinguish people with AS

from people without AS, I would be more inclined to use the AS and

NT descriptors.

As for Neandrothal Theory, my jury is still out on that one as well.

We are two intermixed, in my opinion, to be able to say definitively

that Aspies have their roots in one species more than another. How

do we know that some people don't have more traits than others

simply because, in the random way in which nature works, they just

happened to get a lot of Neandrothal genetic material thrown their

way out of pure chance? How do we know they don't just have traits

that mimic the genetic composition of Neandrothals?

Anyway, I am staying neutral on this whole thing.

Tom

Administrator

It is a pity that " blank slaters " , like you obviously are, does not

listen to reason, but instead present objections based on personal

beliefs.

I see no reason to continue this debate with you unless you can

present consistent, scientific objections against my ideas. Your

view of the world obviously has nothing to do with the validity

of any theory.

Leif

April 3, 2006

Tom:

> His views are based more on the idea that compartamentalizing a

> population is dangerous. Once people begin to associate themselves

> with a " class " the separation is complete and they begin pointing

> fingers at each other, judging another's behavior as " wrong " and so

> on.

Yes, I respect people that feel like this, even though I do not

share this view in regards to AS. I think it is inevitable that we

are separated from others, especially in an increasingly social

world. I think we should separate ourselves instead of

being unconciously separated and discriminated by others.

That way we can better use this to our advantage, especially

in legislation against discrimination.

> From a purely non-scientific perspective, I see the Aspie Quiz more

> as a way to isolate symptoms of AS in people but no more than that.

> While you can draw a coclusion and day " All people with these traits

> have AS " that would be erroneous, because the fact is, many people

> with those traits have AS and some people with those traits don't

> have AS. When the test can successfully distinguish people with AS

> from people without AS, I would be more inclined to use the AS and

> NT descriptors.

It potentially can to a large degree, but this would be contrary to

the original goal. I could get dxes correct on a 90-95%-level, clearly

at par with differences between diagnostic teams, but doing so would

only support DSM and the disorder view of AS. I will not bring in

all the various PTS-related problems that would increase diagnostic

reliability.

Leif

April 3, 2006

Tom:

>> His views are based more on the idea that compartamentalizing a

>> population is dangerous. Once people begin to associate themselves

>> with a " class " the separation is complete and they begin pointing

>> fingers at each other, judging another's behavior as " wrong " and so

>> on.

Leif:

> Yes, I respect people that feel like this, even though I do not

share this view in regards to AS. I think it is inevitable that we

are separated from others, especially in an increasingly social

world. I think we should separate ourselves instead of

being unconciously separated and discriminated by others.

That way we can better use this to our advantage, especially

in legislation against discrimination.

But it does NOT mean that we are necessarily a separate SPECIES. Just one

distinct personality type, among many. An English sheepdog is very different

in temperament, body type etc from a Poodle but both are still dogs.

If your theory ever got accepted, Leif, I expect it would only be used

against us rather than increase tolerance. Then bullies in all echelons of

society could say " Hey, didn't I know it, they're nothing but retarded

Neanderthals! " and feel even more justified in discrimination and bullying,

and doctors in weeding us out of the Hss gene pool for good. :-(

Inger

April 3, 2006

There is no personality type, people have been suggested to that a.S

is this or that way, when in fact many times it's incorrect.

There is no A.S personality type.

>

> Tom:

> >> His views are based more on the idea that compartamentalizing a

> >> population is dangerous. Once people begin to associate

themselves

> >> with a " class " the separation is complete and they begin

pointing

> >> fingers at each other, judging another's behavior as " wrong "

and so

> >> on.

>

> Leif:

> > Yes, I respect people that feel like this, even though I do not

> share this view in regards to AS. I think it is inevitable that we

> are separated from others, especially in an increasingly social

> world. I think we should separate ourselves instead of

> being unconciously separated and discriminated by others.

> That way we can better use this to our advantage, especially

> in legislation against discrimination.

>

> But it does NOT mean that we are necessarily a separate SPECIES.

Just one

> distinct personality type, among many. An English sheepdog is very

different

> in temperament, body type etc from a Poodle but both are still

dogs.

>

> If your theory ever got accepted, Leif, I expect it would only be

used

> against us rather than increase tolerance. Then bullies in all

echelons of

> society could say " Hey, didn't I know it, they're nothing but

retarded

> Neanderthals! " and feel even more justified in discrimination and

bullying,

> and doctors in weeding us out of the Hss gene pool for good. :-(

>

> Inger

>

April 3, 2006

Inger:

> But it does NOT mean that we are necessarily a separate SPECIES. Just one

> distinct personality type, among many. An English sheepdog is very

different

> in temperament, body type etc from a Poodle but both are still dogs.

Whatever way you want it. It is necesary to present it as a different

species, but that is my current research idea.

> If your theory ever got accepted, Leif, I expect it would only be used

> against us rather than increase tolerance. Then bullies in all echelons of

> society could say " Hey, didn't I know it, they're nothing but retarded

> Neanderthals! " and feel even more justified in discrimination and

bullying,

> and doctors in weeding us out of the Hss gene pool for good. :-(

I don't see how that would be possible. The entire Hss genome

is filled with Neanderthal genes. We only have them in larger

proportions.

Leif

April 3, 2006

I am a source of reason, you on the other hand are highly illogical

and have made your reasoning from falsities.

It's a total waste of time debating you, there is no autism species,

no personality type but a developmental disorder. There is no N.T

and such idealogies have only made people feel more seperated from

the rest of the world resulting from this aspie and N.T nonsense.

People are people, autism is symtoms not the person, make them

believe certain things then test them online you can get any

answeres you want.

You are delusional, its not a personal attack, it's how it is. I

hope you find a new interest and think it out some.

>

> :

> > When you have a PHD is when I will listen to you with your

obscure

> theories.

>

> Titles like PhDs are not connected with reliability of theories.

Just look

> at the flood of obscure theories in the autism area that has

passed by.

> Refrigirator mother, " extreme maleness " , brain damage, toxin

damage,

> vaccinations, mirror neurons and hundreds of others. Most of the

originators

> of these theories have academic titles, but does that help when

they have no

> inside knowledge? Nope, not a bit.

>

> It is a pity that " blank slaters " , like you obviously are, does

not listen

> to reason, but instead present objections based on personal

beliefs.

>

> I see no reason to continue this debate with you unless you can

> present consistent, scientific objections against my ideas. Your

> view of the world obviously has nothing to do with the validity

> of any theory.

>

> Leif

>

April 3, 2006

I disagree. I think it is a specific neurological type/temperament, usually

more physically sensitive and mentally oriented than the average human, but

which of course comes with varying individual traits as well.

As for the rest of humanity, I find them being way too diverse to

conveniently stick under one label so I just use the term non-autistic for

those who aren't autistic enough to get a dx.

I think that AS can sometimes be an asset and sometimes a disability,

depending on circumstances. In a society by and for non-autistics

specifically, it is often more of a disability than it would otherwise have

to be, but can also be an asset due to our perseverance, creativity and

out-of-the-box thinking. It may also vary between individuals to what degree

it is a disability or an asset.

I don't think it makes us better or worse than any other human, just

different.

If no tangible difference existed, the dx would not exist and we would all

get along like peas in a pod with non-autistics everywhere and never get