Guest guest Posted May 30, 2006 Report Posted May 30, 2006 > sent me his URL. It's really too much for me to read online. He'd > like feedback from autsitics. Very good, i can endorse it in it entirety. Alain Quote
Guest guest Posted May 30, 2006 Report Posted May 30, 2006 Interesting, and with many valid points, but it seems to be written in too " angry " a fashion to make a real impact except in " preaching to the choir " . I haven't examined it as closely as I want to, but I wish he would've tried to approach the matter in a way that would have made the work more likely to make a significant impact on people who don't already agree with him. In general though, the sentiments espoused by the author (refuting myths, reclassifying the way professionals look at us etc.) are very positive. -Ari > > > sent me his URL. It's really too much for me to read online. He'd > > like feedback from autsitics. > > Very good, i can endorse it in it entirety. > > Alain > > > > > Quote
Guest guest Posted May 30, 2006 Report Posted May 30, 2006 Ari wrote: >Interesting, and with many valid points, but it seems to be written in too > " angry " a fashion to make a real impact except in " preaching to the choir " . I thought the anger was presented well. Since he clearly states that he is writing out of anger, I felt the emotion added power to the writing rather than detracting. Anger is much more off-putting when it is hidden (or denied), when a writer claims to be impartial but allows the anger to seep into the writing. Admitted anger, under control, can add power and also a grim sort of humor, as in the case of that site (what I was able to read of it). My opinion, of course. Jane Quote
Guest guest Posted May 30, 2006 Report Posted May 30, 2006 I don't disagree - I suppose it depends on the purpose of it. I feel like it could have some significance in the autistic community (although I would have to read it thoroughly to say anything for certain), but I wonder to what point and purpose that would lead if we are only affirming and perhaps codifying what we already know, yet not spreading that knowledge elsewhere. I suppose I want to see more of an effort to bring our message outward and correct misconceptions among the people who hold them, as that's where it really needs to be done. Those are just my feelings on the matter. -Ari > > Ari wrote: > >Interesting, and with many valid points, but it seems to be written in > too > > " angry " a fashion to make a real impact except in " preaching to the > choir " . > > I thought the anger was presented well. Since he clearly states that > he is writing out of anger, I felt the emotion added power to the > writing rather than detracting. Anger is much more off-putting when > it is hidden (or denied), when a writer claims to be impartial but > allows the anger to seep into the writing. > > Admitted anger, under control, can add power and also a grim sort of > humor, as in the case of that site (what I was able to read of it). > > My opinion, of course. > > Jane > > > > > Quote
Guest guest Posted June 2, 2006 Report Posted June 2, 2006 Hi, I wrote the article. I wanted to react to the argument about the fashion in which it was written. I had to choose between two optioins: 1. write a decent philosofical/neuro-psychological paper based on decent research, and so trying to make an end to the bs that people like uta frith write. 2. writing of my emotion, and first thoughts. The main difference between the two is (aside from quality of course), the investment needed to publish such things. I am a perfectionist and layperson at both neurology and philosophy. Combination of those would have meant half a life of research in both fields to verify everything, and then publishing a nice quality philosofical work. Since I have other obsessions, that didn't want to be put aside very long, and since there is a lot moving about autism right now, i chose to intervene in the discussion. I also think it was important that this message got out because it stands without any neurological details. In fact, the article is not about autism, but about how NT society reacts on people that are different. A very phreaky subject if you ask me. I think this is also evolving for the worse (since WWII at least), and therefor also needs to be discussed urgently (not necessarily in autist communities). As for why it was written in slang, I think that there also is a danger in judging things upon form rather than content. All autists are probably familiar with people saying you that it is the " tone by which you say something " that offends them. We have evolved to a society where nothing is anymore as it seems. The words democracy has dramatically changed meaning in the last 15 years, at least where im from. Or think of the meaning of " sustainable development " . It has become an active approach of cloaking your evilness with polite words. In this atmosphere, i think things like etiquette are losing all meaning. I didn't want to make myself look nicer than i am by disguising in nice words. we can only see through this cheap mask by not using it anymore i think. Secondly, I think taboes are not a good thing, that's why it freaks me out a bit that people get offended by 'f-words'. It is clear that everybody uses them, that everybody knows exactly what is being said when the tv says beep. The point totally escapes me of forbidding part of our language but letting our kids watch rambo. Same goes for taboes on sexuality. They open a dangerous road to fascism. That's why i have not chosen to disguise my text as a scientific paper, because i don't like to play roles, because i don't care about people that stop reading because of form. Words have a meaning, so i use them. On the other side, i must admit that on reading a philosophical work, I never felt like the slang was missing, so im yet not sure about this subject. One thing is in my/our favour however when reaching the unconvicted. todays psychologists are a school example of the mealymouthed people that like to disguise their evilness with fake political correctness. After all, we idiot autists can't help it that we adress them in an unapropriate angry or impolite way. that's forgiven since we are autists. they are above this. so undoubtedly i will get a polite answer from ms frith and other psychologists. In any case, if you know the emailadresses of any psychologists that you think would 'benifit' from reading this, let me know and I will send them an invite, or send the url yourself, as you please. If you want to reach me, please don't use the yahoo adress, use this : najamelan@... Thank you jane for spreading this... Greetings to you all Quote
Guest guest Posted June 2, 2006 Report Posted June 2, 2006 both formatting and email adress was fucked over by yahoo it seems. apologies. here is the emailadres najamelan {at} gmail dot com Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.