Re: Re: (article) Autism: From Mind Blindness to Context Blindness

[Guest guest]

CJ wrote:

>

>

>> LOL this wasn't meant to be a clinical article, this is an article

>> written for a digest for families of children with autism.

>

> At the risk of belaboring the point.... *context* plays a role here too.

>

> A clinical article is evaluated by the agreed-upon standards of the

> scientific community. That's one context.

>

> Non-clinical articles tend to be evaluated on the basis of whether

> readers can relate to the topic and find the author's words useful. Yet

> another context, with its own set of informal standards.

When the professional believes one " truth " , and the layperson believes

another - what then? I don't believe that's good for clients and

patients, or for professionals either.

- Bill, AS, ...doesn't like the emergent third context = muddled

--

WD " Bill " Loughman - Berkeley, California USA

http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm

[Guest guest]

helen_foisy wrote:

>> CJ wrote:

>>> Another article on the topic... this one featured in Autism

>>> Asperger's Digest. Autism: From Mind Blindness to Context

>>> Blindness

>>> http://autismdigest.com/autism-from-mind-blindness-to-context-blindness/

>>

>>

>>>

Lordy, *lordy*! ...Non-sequiturs and unsubstantiated claims ALL over.

>

> LOL this wasn't meant to be a clinical article, this is an article

> written for a digest for families of children with autism.

Of course, ...unmistakeable. But still wrong at root.

> I liked

> the article and I think it identifies one of the key challenges that

> young autistic children face when trying to navigate the world. The

> article gives parents a *fresh* insight that can help their children

> make sense of instructions and help parents adapt their language so

> that their autistic children might understand them.

[ snip ]

The " fresh insight " is incomplete. Therefore will mislead some readers,

as it seems to have done already.

>

> Bill (still with me?) you yourself have said, and I agree that *any*

Oh, yes indeedy. I always read your posts carefully, most often finding

them both interesting and even wise. ...As you know.

> books, videos etc. that deal with psychology, human relationships,

> employment issues etc. can help give spectrum folks - and anyone -

> more keys to understanding how people click, cooperate and get

> along.

Gaining the keys to understanding is not the same as 'understanding' itself.

- Bill, AS

--

WD " Bill " Loughman - Berkeley, California USA

http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm

[Guest guest]

Most excellent post, .  I really like the way you elaborated on

the issues.

You are so on-target when you say, "Linear logic has its

place. Great for science. Not too good for people, though."

Great job...

~CJ

Comment One.

 

I'm going to keep this very

simple, but try not to be simplistic.

What's involved in understanding context is perspective-taking,

and we can all use that term and its meaning without

"special reference" to autism or to linear logic.

Especially without regard to linear logic, And yes, RDI is

one way of looking at perspective taking, although at this

time I'm pretty sure Steve Gutstein and le Sheely

are getting pretty tired of their own self-coined term,

even though they've raked money in hand over fist with

their "intellectual patent." However, I do take some

comfort in the fact that they've been outrun by others

whose multidisplinary approach to working with adult

intellection has come to run circles around the age and

conceptual limitations of "pure" RDI.

 

Comment Two.

 

Linear logic has its place. Great

for science. Not too good for people, though.

 

Art has its place too, and so do

things that don't make immediate sense or even matter much

at all to "the fact folks."

What Vermeulen's getting at is the process whereby social

beings-- us -- as receiver/senders" learn to develop a

wider perspective --acknowledging context, for example

--when it comes to explaining our "process" to others and

more importantly, relating successfully to and with them

in real life. Not just from the keyboard, and not in

only making I-statements. 

 

However, thank gollies we is so diverse!

 

At the risk of offending, I must

venture to suggest that both Uta Frith and Vermeulen are

and have been for the longest time definitely on to

something new, despite protestations that they're stating

the obvious. That's because if you read their original

works from a long time ago, they both expressed concerns

about things not quite going right even THEN with an

understanding of what autism was/is.

Please remember it was Frith who

did the first creditable translation of Asperger's

original article in her own 1991 edited book of early

contributions on autism/Asperger Syndrome that preceded

publication of the DSM IV. Vermuelen has been around

easily that long as well.

 

I have found that as many folks

who've had difficulty even understanding the idea of being

open to a broader view of things that their

locked-on-it-at-all-costs linear logic trips them up with

increasing frequency to the point where they've become

hobbled by an intellectual need to remain consistent with

former observations, notions, and even hallmark

obsessions, no matter what's put on the table before them.

I'm forced to recall a brief quotation from Self-Reliance

(R.W. Emerson) "A foolish consistency is the

hobgoblin of little minds." 

 

This saying DOESN'T mean we can't

change. And yes, I'm uncomfortable with the "zinger" about

little minds. But ya gotta admit there's been

staying power in the line.

 

Comment Three: There is a good, current

example of what broadband perspective taking can look like from

our own community. From "two of us."

 

If you'd like a good example of

the breadth of view that IS possible once a broader

perspective involving context is taken by some pretty

remarkable critical thinkers, how about carefully reading

the second lengthy policy brief co-authored by Ari Ne'eman

of ASAN and Kapp of LA on ASAN's link to both

comments on the DSM V? Anybody who values not only

research of the literature, but an analysis of

the issues in that literature is bound to have a different

opinion of what "we say and how "we say it" after reading

both of these briefs.

 

On June 6, an exceptionally

well-written comment to the mindless we're going to

do it anyway idiocy of the APA's Work Group is the

first brief. However, Helen has forwarded the links to

both comments 1 (written about a week to ten days ago) and

the most recent one just dated June 15, the day it was

submitted as a closing comment to the DSM V website.

 

Maybe if folks spent some time

reading and thinking first before they reach for their

keyboard, we'll see what an expansive approach to

acknowledging the importance of understanding things

in context is all about. Fruitful as it's been, the

discussion has pretty much been a tempest in a teapot,

although the tea has been quite refreshing.

 

I'm reminded of the imprecations of Hubert Cross begging me to

take my careful recovery and resurrection of his early,

remarkable essay and website on Mindblindness down from my

website because he was concerned about how his early

observations would prejudice the world's treatment of his son

just nearing adulthood. Hubert wanted his words taken back. He

also wanted to re-write history, not only his, but a lot of

other history. Why? Because it didn't suit him just then. Talk

about blindness to context.  A classic example. Fortunately, I

had the good sense to deny his request. Once out there, it's

"simply out there" presented without judgment or editorial

comment as a courtesy to one courageous writer who really got

something right, and wrote about it quite thoughtfully.

 

It's almost as though something that makes our intellectual

teeth itch is something we'd rather wish would go away.

 

But not so fast.

 

Back to Business:

 

This first link is the one sent in

early June: It's "less scholarly" than the lengthier June

15 one, shown below. http://autisticadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/DSM-5_Policy_Brief_ASAN_final.pdf.

However, it's no less political, as politics is just

another way of dressing up sophisticated

contextually-sensitive perspective-taking.

 

Here's the June 15 lengthy policy

brief: http://autisticadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/ASAN_DSM-5_2_final.pdf.

It's overflowing with frequent references to context and

how absence of  considering its role and consequences in

science AND politics within the academy has led to blunder

after hamfisted blunder in the clinical and academic

community.

 

Nuff said.

 

N. Meyer

 

And on with the storm......