Email from WP to ARC request debate on WP with S.B Cohen.

Post Reply New Topic

Regarding the ARC organization, I doubt they would discuss this in a public forum, however if I remember correctly, RDOS, a member here with the Neanderthal Theory of Autism had some email correspondence with SBC, regarding his theory. If we presented serious objective ideas by email, that differ from what they have considered before, we might get a couple of back and forth emails to get the ARC viewpoint.

In my opinion a better approach might be to not ask for a public debate, and focus on a smaller goal for private email correspondence. If they respond with a viewpoint, that might be the time to ask them if they are interested in coming here for discussion.

But, I seriously doubt they are going to be interested in debating their ideas vs our ideas; it might be better presented as a request for discussion to discuss our ideas, leaving their ideas completely out of the conversation. In fact, I wouldn't mention the word debate or mention any of their research in any correspondence, if we want the best possibility of them ever actually coming here to discuss our ideas with us.

I have a hangover.

I got to go and hit things with hammers.

Duh-ouch x 8 hours.

Will think on this one.

Using 'tractor beam' would be rude and most likely interpreted as a hostile act.

They have probably read this already.



Meame.

Hog, when you stick that list in, I hope you're saying "us" as in humanity in general, not ASD peeps specifically. Because if you're saying that list is specific to us - ASD us, I'm gonna add a post tearing it to shreds.

That was not my wording, it is part of the quote from the link I provided from the MontrealGazette. The article has nothing to do with autism; it's about empathy, in general. It's pertinent to environmental factors, and which ones cause people to lose or gain empathy. I used in support of my opinion that this lack of feelings of empathy issue isn't isolated to Autistic people, and certainly not indicative of all Autistic people.

Oddfiction if we are going to shread anything maybe we look at the internal logic of ToM and start testing for structural weakness. I think I have identified on possible area, It may be we do not want to destroy ToM, rather modify it to meet mutually acceptable forms of description and understanding. There are certainly parallel models which seem as strong-as, and a possible fusion of these models may move us all on from our current opposed position.

Here, those like ahogday are suggesting environmental factors may be useful in building part of the potential fused model. Environment does not explain everything but it contains elements of useful understanding from which we can build a unified approach.

This may be one goal- a more unifed field theory drawing on different disciplines.

Dealing with NT's requires a degree of carrot and stick. The first raised stake in the game is I am contacting Dr Thomas S. Szasz, ( Emeritus professor NYSU) to see if he will peer review our approach
and lend support, perhaps he or one of his collegues will make first contact if we are initially ignored by ARC.

This is not a threat or hostile act , merely a status equilization which is required for communication to commence- it seems normal NT proceedure in these matters.

I am doing that now.

The' tractor beam' is not yet engaged , this involves using a number of agencies to bring the debate about, if ARC are not forthcoming. This is a fun game. They should understand it is our 'sport' and play.

Meme

Update : email sent to Dr. T Szasz and Dr J Schaller.

on the logic of ToM

ok there is a classic experiment that I recall from college on this subject.
you have a doll house 1st Molly (the doll) goes into a room in the doll house and has a marble
she hides this marble in a box in the room now she leaves.
Next Fred (another doll) comes into the room and takes Molly's marble from its hiding place and moves it to the closet.

now the observer is asked where Molly will go to find her marble. The ToM argument is that only the Autistic will say to look in the closet 1st (because we know that is where it is as opposed to being able to view the situation through Molly's eyes and look in the box then panic) . is this a lack of understanding her emotions, or a cold view of her, or a reality that giving the logical response that is most accurate is just an inherent part of some of us.


You could even say that in a case like my own (my father has a PHD from Caltec and has just retired from being a professor at Uconn, and, yes I could do the 90's version of Tim Page's book) I grew up in a world of science, I had more friends who were grad students then were my own age, (oddly enough no one caught on to the why of "little professor").
I make this argument because I believe that prior to its being recognized as a diagnosis achademia was where many of us found a home. (like the brilliant guy with no social skills isn't a stereotype for scientists already).

ok i am not sure where the second half of this was goin g either, but In case i can put together no better coherient conclusion, i'll just post as is

I went through a stage where I could never understand how a doll with plastic eyes could have basic sensory awareness , let alone see around a room to find a hidden marble. I think I would have failed this test completely and not been able to express this inbailty to anthromorph a doll to the reseacher. I would have thought it was a lie test to see if I would fall for the NT trick of trying to get me to believe they had a doll that could see. Which I would not have fallen for at this stage and refused to play the game. I have survived to the age of nearly 50 and this is a more useful skill than marble finding, I think.

I agree that the doll test seems kind of unimportant. After all, when will we ever have to turn into a doll to go and find a marble? I suppose it's meant to be used to determine whether we can put ourselves in the shoes of others, but it does seem that they could surely find better examples.

There will always be a few autistic people who think about the test and figure it out, or non-autistic people who give the wrong answer.

I don't think that we lack in empathy in any such way. The way many people put it is incredibly unfair. Some seem to believe that we are unfeeling and do not ever take others into consideration etc. which is completely untrue. People on the spectrum can be incredibly caring and generous even though it might appear in a different way and they might not express it in the same way as an NT.

Though the fact that you might give what seems at the time like the logical answer as a child on the doll test, that doesn't mean that you don't understand that other people have minds and feelings. I think empathy is often defined in the wrong way and the way that people interpret/think about empathy should be challenged.

I like the entire e-mail of the debate or the e-mails to try and make a difference and get our ideas/opinions heard as well as trying to learn more about those opinions as others.

Even though we might not all be scientists or phsychologists there are some things you can only really know about the mind of someone on the spectrum if you are on the spectrum. NT people will interpret things their way and therefore there needs to be a mix of ideas from both sides

I don't think they will understand the humour, I would leave it out and stick to the serious but polite tone.

[q
I don't think they will understand the humour, I would leave it out and stick to the serious but polite tone.[/quote]

Hmm, we don't want to fighten them off. I would be wary about stepping on board this vessel if I were an NT.

This is intended a friendly open communication. I am currently scanning their Twitter communications and hopefully some may respond to messages left there.

I'm inviting them to join in a light-hearted take on sociology . If any of them turn up for this it might be worth encouraging them to return here to debate on a more serious note once they realise the nature of this diplomatic mission.

I will keep hailing them in the hope they respond.

They are certainly aware of our interest in them .

If anyone else has an idea of how to operate the communication called Twitter please feel free to comtact them. It doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me and I'm not actually sure they can read the messages.

Meme

Well said Forestrose.

@memesplice

Dog vs. Wolf empathy:

Research suggests Dogs have empathy for humans, and Wolves can learn it if they are associated with humans.

http://yourlife.usatoday.com/parenting-family/pets/dogs/story/2011/07/Dogs-adept-at-reading-peoples-minds/49607122/1

But levels of sensitivity did vary by how domesticated the dog or wolf was.

Of course, dogs have no purposeful hidden agendas. Maybe that's why some people have more faith in them than humans; I don't think that is just an AS reality.

Why is it that people with Autism are less likely to have hidden agenda's. It's easier for others to understand the hidden agendas because often they are not hidden from others "in the know".

Competition and Cooperation, I think are an equal part of social interaction.

Is it just because we are not as interested in interaction, perhaps lost in ourselves and sensation more than most, not as concerned about competition and cooperation as others are?

I had friends come to the conlusion that I was f**king with people's minds, because I was too smart not to be able to understand what the hidden agendas in what seemed like "secret" slang terms that were being used. Terms of endearment, and slang that bonded groups of people never did anything for me, but it obviously had a bonding affect for others, not unlike when people gossip among themselves.

If I had google back then, I could have at least figured out was the slang meant, but I probably wouldn't have used it if I new what it meant, because if it didn't match the correct picture in my mind I couldn't do it. I think the only word I ever used was "cool" because it represented a relaxing sensation rather than a picture. Sweet was a picture of a nice person in my head, I can't bring myself to change it to represent a sharing of something good that happens in life..

It's a different way of thinking, one which is more meaning specific, I think. Maybe it has something to do with relying more on visual imagery than words when some of us think.

Another example I have heard here is not being able to call people nicknames, when we know their real name. And by nicknames I don't mean alternate normal names, I mean things they that they literally aren't to me like "bull", "grandpa", Bear, Ma. As I look back I clearly remember people like me that would never use the nicknames, and they all seemed to have my same rigid way of thinking.

Why don't we stray off the sidewalk? It seems to me that if it doesn't match what we see as reality, it is hard for us to venture out further to explore the land of emotion and bonding that may motivate others to participate in it.

I don't think we get the same benefit out of it as others do but I'm not sure if it is environment or genetics and the resulting structure/plasticity of our brains that make us one of the few in the group that don't usually participate with the slang and nicknames of others.

Mirror Neurons are their problem, we were spared from living a reflection of our suroundings.

Sometimes I try, but when I read their state of mind I try to put them at ease by petting their head and giving a scratch behind the ears.

Simon my man! Let me put it in the greatest words ever spoken for you. "Frankly my dear, I do not give a damn." It is not that I missed the signal, I just ignored it.

While I do have goals and missions, reading how you are upset because the tea is not hot does not help fix the computer. Seeing me as rejecting your humanity is seeing clearly. You have been living in a world of pandering, I invite you to join non pandering. I have studied your type, traffic is the last place to have an emotional reaction to thing beyond your control. Accept that, and you could accept me.

We do have the same mirror neurons, by ours are tuned to the physical world. How could anyone think they could do research while being most concerned with the mental state of the people working around you?

Besides that, why is it you all copy word for word anything that has been published before, without question? I have to question the present, and past, before I can take a shot at the future. If the future had to fit all prior work, because it was peer reviewed and published, we would be stuck in a mess that would look just like today.

Science has to be done with an open mind, forgetting what you learned is a good start. Just like no one invents anything, it was always there, just waiting for an open mind to see it.

I've never had much emotional response to traffic either; never attributed it to AS, but as I remember quite a few of the other people I have driven with are highly reactive to that type of thing.

I have found it to be a bit overstimulating at times, moreso when I was stressed by other things.

Fascinating discussion meme. I wish I'd seen it sooner.

If polled, I'd vote for open discussion/conversation, with some kind of time limit, end point, to allay fears that it will just go on and on. Public rather than private, would give them a feeling of greater control.

One invitation is easy to ignore. One invitation per week is, (eventually), potentially embarassing when ignored.
As in..."Simon! How could you ignore those poor bastards, (who, after all, just want to talk to you,)week, after week, after week....?! !"

They really ought to look beyond children. Mature adults with high functioning Aspergers/ HFA, often develop quite good cognitive empathy. We sometimes lag in the moment, but often with the aid of visual thinking are able to develop excellent social pattern reasoning (cognitive empathy strung round with all sorts of real live feelings).

Just look at the career coices of women with Aspergers. Cognitive psychologist and social worker, are popular choices, as are other types of the caring professions, (re. Women From Another Planet.)

The Sally/ Ann and Molly/ Fred Tests are skewed by visual thinking perseveration. They don't actually test empathy. Not in an universal sense anyway. Auditory sequential thinkers usually come up with the worst, most ridiculous experiments/ tests for visual minds.

If this is the same Dr. Thomas Szasz, (and really how many could there be?) who is billed as "The Psychiatric Abolitionist", I rather doubt he'd be viewed as neutral. I'd vote for Dr. Elyn R. Saks, not that, that would ever happen.

I think an exchange of opinion and ideas with professionals, who speak for us and about us, to the dominant culture, is an excellent idea. It's looooooong overdue.

plantwhisperer

I am not sure if my attempts to use the Twitter communciation are effective. It is possible they have made a tentative response. I am not even sure it is intended for us . It may be an invitation to join in a neutal friendly 'converstion' and see if we can follow their rules of particpation

The message they have posted is one containing a formidable NT warrior called Jean Claude Van Damme. It depicts him drinking beer. He describes his pants becoming frozen. It is clearly self depreciating ironic humor and I found it funny.

The message contains both a diminished potential threat and beer. It is clearly a friendly message but as I say it may not be a direct response to, perhaps a tangential offer of open communication?

Could all those intrested in making friendly contact with NT researchers please give opinions on how to proceed?

Here is the commerical. Please suggest response/s .


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdHocrK59bo&feature=relmfu[/youtube]