|
|
Post by bethduckie on Sept 9, 2006 9:40:20 GMT
I dont think autism has anything to do with people liking Aisleyne or not. But then i dont accept that autistics have less empathy either. Different responses, yes... much of what we call empathy is actually projection based on a shared understanding of the world- if you are autistic and experience the world in very different ways, projection would be far more difficult.
|
|
|
|
Post by beajie on Sept 9, 2006 22:21:28 GMT
I dont think autism has anything to do with people liking Aisleyne or not. But then i dont accept that autistics have less empathy either. Different responses, yes... much of what we call empathy is actually projection based on a shared understanding of the world- if you are autistic and experience the world in very different ways, projection would be far more difficult. So you don't believe in the mirror neurons thingy? Projection based on shared understanding of the 'world' is a shared understanding of a social world, where herd others help and guide us, from birth. Do you agree? |
|
|
|
Post by bethduckie on Sept 10, 2006 21:23:50 GMT
Mmmmm... not sure. It isnt a case of *believing* it or not- there are so many studies of autism which have 'proven' anything from bad parenting to mercury poisoning. Mirror neurons may be involved, or they may be involved for some, or it may be a theory which is discredited by future research, right now it's hard to tell. I would like to see more research about neuron involvement. How does it tie in with the studies concerning migration of minicolumns in early pregnancy? How do the genetics of Rett, Tuberous sclerosis and other autism or autism-like conditions figure in all this? www.springerlink.com/content/j2k1732t42110565 is a study which shows that empathy in one particular autism group isnt as clear cut as a simple lack. The empathy argument reminds me of the intelligence argument. Years ago, it was thought that most- if not all- people on the spectrum were extemely low intelligence. Frith cites an average IQ of 50 with a range about the same as the normal range (which is a standard deviation of 15?- so the majority autistics would fall between 65 and 35) Since then, that theory has been quashed, most autistics are not within that range. moreover, if the Raven test is used to measure IQ autistics score far higher- the Raven not being language based like the standard Weschler (um.. spelling??) Again, its not just WHAT you measure but HOW you measure it.  B xxx |
|
|
|
Post by beajie on Sept 10, 2006 22:14:40 GMT
Mmmmm... not sure. It isnt a case of *believing* it or not- there are so many studies of autism which have 'proven' anything from bad parenting to mercury poisoning. Mirror neurons may be involved, or they may be involved for some, or it may be a theory which is discredited by future research, right now it's hard to tell. I would like to see more research about neuron involvement. How does it tie in with the studies concerning migration of minicolumns in early pregnancy? How do the genetics of Rett, Tuberous sclerosis and other autism or autism-like conditions figure in all this? www.springerlink.com/content/j2k1732t42110565 is a study which shows that empathy in one particular autism group isnt as clear cut as a simple lack. The empathy argument reminds me of the intelligence argument. Years ago, it was thought that most- if not all- people on the spectrum were extemely low intelligence. Frith cites an average IQ of 50 with a range about the same as the normal range (which is a standard deviation of 15?- so the majority autistics would fall between 65 and 35) Since then, that theory has been quashed, most autistics are not within that range. moreover, if the Raven test is used to measure IQ autistics score far higher- the Raven not being language based like the standard Weschler (um.. spelling??) Again, its not just WHAT you measure but HOW you measure it. B xxx Raven Progressive Matrices are the tests that most people on the spectrum welcome and validate. They test IQ without intervention of verbal intelligence. I can't do them at all.  Well, only to the 120 IQ level, which is 40+ points below my verbal IQ). I don't see how the mirror neuron research impacts upon IQ or whatever. It's a ToM matter. We know that people on the spectrum can access emotional information, and share it. They may have alexythemia. But learning about socal intelligence, and applying the learning, may be different from having this as an innate function, which bypasses cognitive processes, and is automatic. Uta Frith may have been speaking about very low functioning people on the spectrum. We now know that Einstein was on the spectrum, as is Bill Gates, so what can I say? I'm not arguing about intelligence. We know that this is distributed amongst all varied cognitive differences. This is NOT the issue. What are you trying to say? Do you accept that social intelligence is valid? |
|
|
|
Post by bethduckie on Sept 11, 2006 19:05:17 GMT
Nope, not saying the IQ factor is relevent to the question, just saying I see parallels in the way thinking about autistic intelligence has changed over time and how thinking about autistic empathy may change over time. In that, in my opinion, it is far more complicated than a simple lack. Just as the 'autistics have low intelligence' has changed into 'autistics have different forms of intelligence which need different forms of measurement' the thinking surrounding empathy is in the very earliest stages and needs to go a lot further before it even begins to reflect reality. The empathy issue is (or at least I believe it is) not currently sufficient enough to explain how I personally know, and know of several 'low functioning' autistic people who are very empathic. Of course not in neurotypical ways, but then again... they are autistic.
|
|
