|
Sweetleaf
Metalhead
Joined: Jan 07, 2011
Age: 23
Posts: 14828
Location: Somewhere in Colorado
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 12:54 pm Post subject: Re: Neurodiversity is not a 'nice word for autism supremacy' |
 |
|
| dalurker wrote: | | JuggaspieZ2k wrote: | | We don't think we are better than anyone else, we think that autism is a difference to be cherished. We do not oppose all therapies for LFA, we oppose harsh therapies such as chelation and punishment with electricity. We don't think that we are possessed or covered up by our autism. We are our autism! We oppose restricting non-harmful stimming because we know it doesn't put LFA in their own world. They would want to be in our world if we treated them right! |
I think many of you do think you're better than some others. Electricity isn't a therapy, and you know that. You're just saying that to make the prospect of any substantial therapy seem pathetic and dangerous, while you still oppose any effort to make a real cure. You're not just there to "cherish" autism. Those advocating it are trying to keep disability around in those who have it, just as long as they themselves aren't impaired. It's a bunch of high-functioners with loads of aptitude/skills/ability etc., trying to keep the lower functioning ones, who have a devastating lack of those things, from attaining them through cure. The anti-cure crowd wants to keep all of their "gifts" for themselves. |
ECT is actually still used, not typically for autism but more for depression.......I certainly don't want ECT for my depression though, I think I'll avoid the feeling like there's a black hole where my memories should be which is what the after effects are described as. I personally cannot speak for the OP or anyone else other than myself but I certainly don't think I am better then anyone because of having autism, that's stupid to me I mean even if it could be proven as true I just don't see much reason to focus on 'oh im so superior.' but that's just me.
Also I don't think there will be a cure so I don't think much about it, but I can understand the attitude of not liking the idea of one.....considering autism is not the same as some illness you develop or some disease you get, its basically a different brain wiring and messing too much with that could actually do more harm than good. I mean some of the external therapies using the punishment/reward model can even cause problems I mean trying to train someone who does not function neurotypically by punishing any of their 'autistic' behavior and rewarding any so called neurotically behavior is just sadistic and gives off the wrong message. So no I do not think people should be barred from therapy, or cures they want but it should not be pushed on anyone. Another thing is if a cure or therapy is used for any reason other than it being in the best interest of the individual being given the cure or therapy I definitely disagree with it.
_________________
It's like alice in wonderland except, my names not alice and this is the real world not a dream. |
|
| Back to top |
|
dalurker
Phoenix
Joined: Sep 14, 2008
Posts: 514
Location: NY
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 1:47 pm Post subject: Re: Neurodiversity is not a 'nice word for autism supremacy' |
|
|
| Sweetleaf wrote: |
considering autism is not the same as some illness you develop or some disease you get, its basically a different brain wiring and messing too much with that could actually do more harm than good. |
But the technologies are getting so robust and are becoming capable of understanding the many aspects of the neurology involved. But many aspects of brain functioning vary among those who are autistic, which contributes to the wide disparities in functioning/aptitude and therefore success, among individuals with autism. Whatever differences in the brain that are causing some autistics to be relatively impaired and others to be relatively skilled/abled, need to be changed. So even if there's a particular brain wiring that is similar for all with autism, that may not be what really has to be changed.
| Quote: | | So no I do not think people should be barred from therapy, or cures they want but it should not be pushed on anyone. Another thing is if a cure or therapy is used for any reason other than it being in the best interest of the individual being given the cure or therapy I definitely disagree with it. |
It's not going to be pushed on anyone. It can't really be done for reasons other than the bringing of opportunities. It's not going to be done in order to control others. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Magneto
Phoenix
Joined: Jun 13, 2009
Age: 18
Posts: 896
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Erm, children don't get a choice in whether they get it or not. It doesn't matter whether you claim it won't be pushed on anyone or not, when it most likely will be, because parents get the final say and not the child. It doesn't, ultimately, matter what the intentions are when something is being developed - human beings by their nature will use it to control others, the question being by how much.
_________________
"The only universal message in science fiction: There exist minds that think as well as you do, but differently." - Larry Niven
http://needsmoremarshmallows.blogspot.co.uk/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
Sweetleaf
Metalhead
Joined: Jan 07, 2011
Age: 23
Posts: 14828
Location: Somewhere in Colorado
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 4:00 pm Post subject: Re: Neurodiversity is not a 'nice word for autism supremacy' |
|
|
| dalurker wrote: | | Sweetleaf wrote: |
considering autism is not the same as some illness you develop or some disease you get, its basically a different brain wiring and messing too much with that could actually do more harm than good. |
But the technologies are getting so robust and are becoming capable of understanding the many aspects of the neurology involved. But many aspects of brain functioning vary among those who are autistic, which contributes to the wide disparities in functioning/aptitude and therefore success, among individuals with autism. Whatever differences in the brain that are causing some autistics to be relatively impaired and others to be relatively skilled/abled, need to be changed. So even if there's a particular brain wiring that is similar for all with autism, that may not be what really has to be changed.
The brain is almost as unknown to humans as the universe is.....I mean it is very possible there isn't a way to change that, not to mention maybe it turns out its more the environment that contributes most to impairment. Maybe it is something genetic they could try to change obviously with some risks......but at the moment no one knows for sure. Another issue is no two brains look the same so how are they going to figure out exactly what it is that might cause some with autism to have less impairment. I mean I've taken psychology and the only thing they knew for certain is there is so much we don't even understand about how human brains work.
| Quote: | | So no I do not think people should be barred from therapy, or cures they want but it should not be pushed on anyone. Another thing is if a cure or therapy is used for any reason other than it being in the best interest of the individual being given the cure or therapy I definitely disagree with it. |
It's not going to be pushed on anyone. It can't really be done for reasons other than the bringing of opportunities. It's not going to be done in order to control others. |
Well one would hope so.
_________________
It's like alice in wonderland except, my names not alice and this is the real world not a dream. |
|
| Back to top |
|
dalurker
Phoenix
Joined: Sep 14, 2008
Posts: 514
Location: NY
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Magneto wrote: | | Erm, children don't get a choice in whether they get it or not. It doesn't matter whether you claim it won't be pushed on anyone or not, when it most likely will be, because parents get the final say and not the child. It doesn't, ultimately, matter what the intentions are when something is being developed - human beings by their nature will use it to control others, the question being by how much. |
Children don't get choices when it comes to many things because they're children. They aren't capable of making many decisions for themselves. And nobody wants to be impaired. Look around you, where individuals are brutally controlling other individuals already, which is easier to do when one lacks resources and is dependent on others, including dependence coming from lack of ability. You can't discredit something so progressive as cure, by mentioning some vague extraordinary unrealistic set of circumstances in which it could be malicious. Cure is wanted so that there can be real opportunity and real options, for those who don't have it now. Who would be against that? But you make any "curebie" out to be the heavy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Sweetleaf
Metalhead
Joined: Jan 07, 2011
Age: 23
Posts: 14828
Location: Somewhere in Colorado
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 4:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dalurker wrote: | | Magneto wrote: | | Erm, children don't get a choice in whether they get it or not. It doesn't matter whether you claim it won't be pushed on anyone or not, when it most likely will be, because parents get the final say and not the child. It doesn't, ultimately, matter what the intentions are when something is being developed - human beings by their nature will use it to control others, the question being by how much. |
Children don't get choices when it comes to many things because they're children. They aren't capable of making many decisions for themselves. And nobody wants to be impaired. Look around you, where individuals are brutally controlling other individuals already, which is easier to do when one lacks resources and is dependent on others, including dependence coming from lack of ability. You can't discredit something so progressive as cure, by mentioning some vague extraordinary unrealistic set of circumstances in which it could be malicious. Cure is wanted so that there can be real opportunity and real options, for those who don't have it now. Who would be against that? But you make any "curebie" out to be the heavy. |
Well that is where it gets tricky, not all parents or caretakers of children have the best interest of the child in mind. Also how do you imagine they will cure autism, by rearranging autistic peoples brains trying to get it right? because that is literally what it would consist of u'd either have to try and weed out Autism via eugenics......or screw around with brains of autistic people trying to make them work like a neurotypical brain. Who wants the cure? |
|
| Back to top |
|
dalurker
Phoenix
Joined: Sep 14, 2008
Posts: 514
Location: NY
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 4:15 pm Post subject: Re: Neurodiversity is not a 'nice word for autism supremacy' |
|
|
| Quote: |
The brain is almost as unknown to humans as the universe is.....I mean it is very possible there isn't a way to change that, not to mention maybe it turns out its more the environment that contributes most to impairment. Maybe it is something genetic they could try to change obviously with some risks......but at the moment no one knows for sure. Another issue is no two brains look the same so how are they going to figure out exactly what it is that might cause some with autism to have less impairment. I mean I've taken psychology and the only thing they knew for certain is there is so much we don't even understand about how human brains work.
|
I think in the future, there may even be ways to reverse problems caused by environmental factors also. There already is evidence surfacing regarding biological differences associated with differences in severity of autism. There's still a lot to be researched, but they're getting closer. And the technology to gain that information and make it therapeutic, only will increase further. I've read a lot of stuff on the brain's workings, and the detail with which it's understood now by scientists, seems to be getting very sharp. |
|
| Back to top |
|
dalurker
Phoenix
Joined: Sep 14, 2008
Posts: 514
Location: NY
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sweetleaf wrote: |
Also how do you imagine they will cure autism, by rearranging autistic peoples brains trying to get it right? because that is literally what it would consist of u'd either have to try and weed out Autism via eugenics......or screw around with brains of autistic people trying to make them work like a neurotypical brain. Who wants the cure? |
I think it would involve some kind of "rearrangement". But as far as I know, it may involve remedies that increase connectivity within the brain where it could be lacking. Such as reversing the difficulties in interactions between neurons, and the difficulties in long distance communication between distant areas of the brain. It may include forms of gene therapy, which are getting very sophisticated. This would have to be intricately planned and understood before it's attempted, of course. And the goal isn't really to make a brain work like a "neurotypical" one. It's just to increase functioning needed for basic skills and forms of learning. |
|
| Back to top |
|
aspie48
Phoenix
Joined: Mar 20, 2011
Posts: 1286
Location: up s**t creek with a fan as a paddle
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2012 1:06 pm Post subject: Re: Neurodiversity is not a 'nice word for autism supremacy' |
|
|
| dalurker wrote: | | webcam wrote: |
I think we should wait and see with the LFAs. For all we know they are just evolving differently and we have no right to cut within any category... Evolution takes a really really long time and we don't yet know all of the mechanics involved. They may seem to be a lesser race, but their difference in genetics precipitates a different path of change. Until we can accurately predict that path, changing it could result in less diversity among our kind.
Of course their are other solutions I just came up with (exposing cultivated germlines to germline viruses and other experiments that mirror evolution)... what doesn't kill you may make you stronger), but they aren't possible until we can more accurately predict genetics and understand genetic histories... but it really doesn't matter until we control our own destiny...
The important part is that we someday own the research and know it well enough to predict a person based on genetic expression. |
spoken like hitler. you express your opinions too well militant pro-cure.
The technological capacity is much higher today. We're capable of knowing what to do to help, when the genes are identified, and known for what they do and how they're regulated. Gene therapy is going through advances too. They aren't evolving differently. They're being negatively selected against. They're bearing the losses of the random processes that produce genetic variation. Genetic diversity can be managed. Someday, the knowledge to predict and understand the consequences/value of certain variations may exist. Experiments that simulate evolution seem like a great idea. We don't need to leave things up to chaos and volatility any longer. There should be plans made to prevent genetic factors from damaging individuals' functioning. |
_________________
I've been through windows, doors, tv's, and chairs
But I never let go, And I pulled out most of their hair
I've mellowed a lot since then
So it takes two seconds
For me to knock the hell right out of you-Hank Williams |
|
| Back to top |
|
Invader
Velociraptor
Joined: Aug 17, 2010
Age: 29
Posts: 458
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2012 6:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Speak for yourself. I believe 100% that we are better than everyone else. |
|
| Back to top |
|
dalurker
Phoenix
Joined: Sep 14, 2008
Posts: 514
Location: NY
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2012 7:06 pm Post subject: Re: Neurodiversity is not a 'nice word for autism supremacy' |
|
|
| Quote: |
spoken like hitler. you express your opinions too well militant pro-cure.
|
Don't make a spectacle of yourself with such a nonsense remark. But being militant pro-cure is a positive thing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
webcam
Velociraptor
Joined: Feb 09, 2012
Posts: 427
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2012 7:48 pm Post subject: Re: Neurodiversity is not a 'nice word for autism supremacy' |
|
|
| dalurker wrote: | | webcam wrote: |
Hmmm I think that still kinda scares me. Ability based protection alone isn't enough. Our culture as it will form when we come together will be largely driven by genetics. There needs to be protection of culture related traits and personality, quirks and differences. IMO, if it doesn't interfere with the person's survival or is only compromised by social systems it must remain. We must always remember our natural roots. |
It doesn't matter if it scares you. Too much is at stake. I honestly don't care for the concerns of the ones out there who are not experiencing pain, who obsess over "culture", even while the culture now is degenerate already. They won't stop talking of "quirks" while they are inconsiderate in their extreme individualism. They talk of this to distract others from the real issues of ability, where the real problem lies. |
Inconsiderance in extreme individualism comes from rebellion. Our friends who suffer this are this way do so largely because they have largely not known their culture. Personally, I met a savant a while back and at our second meeting I became the person with whom he cultured with (spoke with) the most in his entire life. We came together and spoke at length on various scientific topics and continued hanging out for for a few weeks until I eventually disturbed his social equilibrium. The difference between us (my friend and I) is age and wisdom, I have decided to live outside my shallow social world and build something better, we need to learn from everyone, especially ourselves (sometimes it means teaching). I'm at a point where I want to have children and I want to pass on culture to them and I understand my children are going to need more than just me for a role model in their lives and I don't want their lives dominated by neurotypical thought alone. I want my children to feel comfortable being who they are and don't want them to feel like outcasts growing up. As I see it, all we struggle through today is what we must fix for our children. We don't need to fix our children. Though giving them gifts of talent will certainly be beneficial to them. Have you ever considered that talents like our can be taught? I assure you they can be learned, so they can indeed be taught which leads me think that perhaps culture will yield more talent than gene therapy. I'm also toying with considerations of "bad behavior" and eccentric dietary needs beyond those currently addressed.
My point here is that we shouldn't count out our culture because something seems inconsiderate, and we need to build culture that considerate. If culture is considerate, there won't be as much need for us scale back our eccentricities.
Can you name some things you feel are inconsiderate? |
|
| Back to top |
|
webcam
Velociraptor
Joined: Feb 09, 2012
Posts: 427
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2012 7:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dalurker wrote: | | Magneto wrote: | | Erm, children don't get a choice in whether they get it or not. It doesn't matter whether you claim it won't be pushed on anyone or not, when it most likely will be, because parents get the final say and not the child. It doesn't, ultimately, matter what the intentions are when something is being developed - human beings by their nature will use it to control others, the question being by how much. |
Children don't get choices when it comes to many things because they're children. They aren't capable of making many decisions for themselves. And nobody wants to be impaired. Look around you, where individuals are brutally controlling other individuals already, which is easier to do when one lacks resources and is dependent on others, including dependence coming from lack of ability. You can't discredit something so progressive as cure, by mentioning some vague extraordinary unrealistic set of circumstances in which it could be malicious. Cure is wanted so that there can be real opportunity and real options, for those who don't have it now. Who would be against that? But you make any "curebie" out to be the heavy. |
Still, I wouldn't want anyone fixing my kids with gene therapy. Let them (kids) decide what they want when they are able to think for themselves and think outside of the information that is handed to them. Obviously giving them only info from Autism Speaks and other genocidal organizations won't help. The really do need to be able to think for themselves and be kept from developing the standard media driven opinions or opinions simply of rebellion to the media driven opinions. Either would be just as bad. |
|
| Back to top |
|
webcam
Velociraptor
Joined: Feb 09, 2012
Posts: 427
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2012 8:06 pm Post subject: Re: Neurodiversity is not a 'nice word for autism supremacy' |
|
|
| dalurker wrote: | | Quote: |
The brain is almost as unknown to humans as the universe is.....I mean it is very possible there isn't a way to change that, not to mention maybe it turns out its more the environment that contributes most to impairment. Maybe it is something genetic they could try to change obviously with some risks......but at the moment no one knows for sure. Another issue is no two brains look the same so how are they going to figure out exactly what it is that might cause some with autism to have less impairment. I mean I've taken psychology and the only thing they knew for certain is there is so much we don't even understand about how human brains work.
|
I think in the future, there may even be ways to reverse problems caused by environmental factors also. There already is evidence surfacing regarding biological differences associated with differences in severity of autism. There's still a lot to be researched, but they're getting closer. And the technology to gain that information and make it therapeutic, only will increase further. I've read a lot of stuff on the brain's workings, and the detail with which it's understood now by scientists, seems to be getting very sharp. |
I feel that epigenetics are partly responsible for storing environmental factors and passing them from generation to generation, or even developing in life. I read a license plate today that stated "Those who can make you believe in absurdity can also make you commit horrible atrocities" If this is correct, it is likely through epigenetics that people are programed by society to do what goes against their nature by the people who are passionate about changing the minds of people with angry attacks, responses of disbelief, black and white arguments, and stubborn personality. Our society should definitely be free of this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
webcam
Velociraptor
Joined: Feb 09, 2012
Posts: 427
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2012 8:12 pm Post subject: Re: Neurodiversity is not a 'nice word for autism supremacy' |
|
|
| aspie48 wrote: | | dalurker wrote: | | webcam wrote: |
I think we should wait and see with the LFAs. For all we know they are just evolving differently and we have no right to cut within any category... Evolution takes a really really long time and we don't yet know all of the mechanics involved. They may seem to be a lesser race, but their difference in genetics precipitates a different path of change. Until we can accurately predict that path, changing it could result in less diversity among our kind.
Of course their are other solutions I just came up with (exposing cultivated germlines to germline viruses and other experiments that mirror evolution)... what doesn't kill you may make you stronger), but they aren't possible until we can more accurately predict genetics and understand genetic histories... but it really doesn't matter until we control our own destiny...
The important part is that we someday own the research and know it well enough to predict a person based on genetic expression. |
spoken like hitler. you express your opinions too well militant pro-cure.
The technological capacity is much higher today. We're capable of knowing what to do to help, when the genes are identified, and known for what they do and how they're regulated. Gene therapy is going through advances too. They aren't evolving differently. They're being negatively selected against. They're bearing the losses of the random processes that produce genetic variation. Genetic diversity can be managed. Someday, the knowledge to predict and understand the consequences/value of certain variations may exist. Experiments that simulate evolution seem like a great idea. We don't need to leave things up to chaos and volatility any longer. There should be plans made to prevent genetic factors from damaging individuals' functioning. |
|
Should this read...
| dalurker wrote: | | webcam wrote: |
I think we should wait and see with the LFAs. For all we know they are just evolving differently and we have no right to cut within any category... Evolution takes a really really long time and we don't yet know all of the mechanics involved. They may seem to be a lesser race, but their difference in genetics precipitates a different path of change. Until we can accurately predict that path, changing it could result in less diversity among our kind.
Of course their are other solutions I just came up with (exposing cultivated germlines to germline viruses and other experiments that mirror evolution)... what doesn't kill you may make you stronger), but they aren't possible until we can more accurately predict genetics and understand genetic histories... but it really doesn't matter until we control our own destiny...
The important part is that we someday own the research and know it well enough to predict a person based on genetic expression. |
The technological capacity is much higher today. We're capable of knowing what to do to help, when the genes are identified, and known for what they do and how they're regulated. Gene therapy is going through advances too. They aren't evolving differently. They're being negatively selected against. They're bearing the losses of the random processes that produce genetic variation. Genetic diversity can be managed. Someday, the knowledge to predict and understand the consequences/value of certain variations may exist. Experiments that simulate evolution seem like a great idea. We don't need to leave things up to chaos and volatility any longer. There should be plans made to prevent genetic factors from damaging individuals' functioning. |
| aspie48 wrote: |
spoken like hitler. you express your opinions too well militant pro-cure.
|
[/quote]
I'm not sure why anyone would be arguing that I am speaking Hitlerish... I'm talking preservation here... Am I missing something? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
