Re: Context. Bill and CJ.

[Guest guest]

Ron Hedgcock wrote:

> Ah Bill,

>

> For me, the idea of ‘context’ as being a significant issue in the social

> awkwardness of AS, is particularly relevant. I’ve made my biggest ‘fox’s

> pas’ over and over again through misjudging context.

[ snip ]

Yes, *of course* misunderstanding a given context (of anything, at any

time) will lead to mistakes.

> I just don’t care one scrap if it is an old idea. To

> me it is a good one. Of course NT folk can have the trouble too, but as

> far as I’m concerned it represents one of the major disablement problems

> that I can face.

Ron, I think you and CJ have misread both my words and my intent in

writing them. My quarrel wasn't with the importance of context in

" social " exchanges, for good or for ill.

Rather, it was with Vermeulen's misappropriation of the *idea* of

context - its essence - and *his* misunderstanding of what " context "

really is, and does, in *any* relationship, animate or not,

That was my reason for mentioning The Chinese Room - a classic

proposition (from AI research) which underlies and supports the very

neuro-cognitive concepts Vermeulen is trying to exploit. Perhaps he

doesn't know the history of his own field, or maybe simply is ignoring it.

[ snip ]

> I’m not going to get into the scientific debates that you clever devils

> might have over the value or importance of the context issue when it

> comes to diagnosis or the sheer matter of identification of the

> Syndrome. For me it is still a highly important factor in my social

> difficulties. Along with CJ I think this is something that is absolutely

> crucial.

[ snip ]

Yes, it *is* " absolutely crucial " to understand " context " correctly.

*I never wrote otherwise, nor would I ever* understood me, ...I

think.

- Bill, AS, ...disagreement is one thing; misreading is quite another.

--

WD " Bill " Loughman - Berkeley, California USA

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