Re: Autism Spectrum Disorders as Context Blindness

[Guest guest]

Ahhh. I missed the Bill comments. When I was at school. I liked physics. In physics you had formula's ( formulae?)you could predict things happening. Precisely. Things in physics worked- there were laws. Remeber Newtowns laws of motion?There were laws of motion and it didnt matter what planet or solar system you were in....these laws were Universal ( note the use of the capital U) AS folks feel comforted by laws and rules- there is no ambiguity- no need to interpret the laws there is just an understanding of them. Like a Dolphin

that is surrounded by water- the Dolphin doesnt have a word for water and if Dolphins could speak they wouldnt be able to describe water- they just understand it. So AS folks like the predictability of laws of motion, engineering and chemistry and we pervade these professions and do well in them- we dont need to speak of these understandings within these professions- we just understand them. Then....you have biology. Biology has theories- no laws. The best biology has is Darwins theory of evolution...not a Law and Newtown laughs at the biologists high up in his sturdy construction that is held together by three laws......We biologists look up to Newtown with awe and slight misunderstanding as we look back at events, us biologists and

we say " yes i thought that would happen" "yes I thought it would happen" applies to every biological observation- to satisfy ourselves with our hindsight we even attribute a statitical analysis to some of these observations. the point being there is nothing in biology that can be predicted......biology is an emergent property of chemistry (with its laws and equations.)..biology takes these law and skews them into a new science - the science of rear vision mirror where we look back and say- yes i thought that would happen. physics lets us predict and build, understand with certainty- biology lets us do none of these things..it is a

corrupted science. so we look back and say- yes we thought that would happen and the testers test for AS and they say yes he has it..........i thought he would. you cannot predict anything about a biological system- did i mention physics?- now here we have laws..... 40 AS biologist- unsatisfied The information in this document is confidential and is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this document by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient,

any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, except for the purpose of delivery to the addressee, is prohibited and may be unlawful. This document and the content remains the intellectual property of To: aspires-relationships Sent: Sunday, 17 June 2012, 23:25 Subject: Re: Autism Spectrum Disorders as Context Blindness

Newland wrote:

> Greetings:

>

> I saw this book and concept on another list.

>

> Comments?

Vermeulen is a bright guy. *Very* bright -- and dead wrong in

this case.

Why? Because he's adding, trying to add, "attributes" and

"understandings" to current concepts of "autism" -- a human condition

for which there is *NO OBJECTIVE TEST*. In other words, there are *NO

Necessary and Sufficient criteria* for deciding that a person "has"

autism, or is autistic.

Without such criteria, *all* theories of autism are like castles of

sand: attractive structures which last only until the next big wave.

Vermeulen's ideas about context and autism have strong cognates with

years-old arguments about machine programming and "intelligence" -- a

machine condition for which there is no objective test.

These turned on *criteria* for intelligence, and came to a

philosophical boil with Searle's 1980s notion of "The Chinese Room"

- which attempted to settle the issues.

That in turn provoked hundreds? of learned papers which equally did

not settle anything. In the end they provided some enlightenment,

....but *no solution*.

In a similar way, and for similar reasons, I expect Vermeulen's "new

idea" to provoke similar commentary - and no solution. Some light,

perhaps; no fire.

- Bill, ...AS, ...opinionated

--

WD "Bill" Loughman - Berkeley, California USA

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