GlobusGlobus

GlobusGlobus t1_iye0qfv wrote

Reply to comment by earthsworld in Autism Breakthrough: New Treatment Significantly Improves Social Skills and Brain Function by Shelfrock77

I dont think it is possible today to make a much better definition. They recently scrapped the old, more variation rich definition because it lacked support. That was probably the right thing to do. But the new one is so broad that it is bordering on the meaningless. Everyone knows. I dont think they made a bad job, it is just not well understood.

​

Edit: I am mostly talking about DSM5 vs DSM4.

0

GlobusGlobus t1_iydbikw wrote

Reply to comment by earthsworld in Autism Breakthrough: New Treatment Significantly Improves Social Skills and Brain Function by Shelfrock77

I really dislike you. You are a very bad person.

There is a difference between spectrum and completely different things. Now, this is known and well-established. I mean, the people who created the current definition of autism are well aware of this definition being a failure, it is just that we can't do better with the current level of understanding.

1

GlobusGlobus t1_iyd8qoo wrote

Reply to comment by SafeHayven in Autism Breakthrough: New Treatment Significantly Improves Social Skills and Brain Function by Shelfrock77

Well, if you define autism so that everyone that cares about anything are autists then the rest follow.s You can't have any ethics if you are absolutely oblivious to everything around you.

Now, I am not claiming that non-autists are immoral or in any way less moral than autists. On the contrary I am suggesting that a definition of autism that leas to this conclusion probably is not great.

−2

GlobusGlobus t1_iycfje2 wrote

Reply to Autism Breakthrough: New Treatment Significantly Improves Social Skills and Brain Function by Shelfrock77

The problem with understanding what this means is that current understanding of autism and how to limit the conditions makes the term autism unusable. It is certainly a group of very different conditions that we call autism. And the fact that one of the major indications of autism is not being completely oblivious to the world should tell us that the current view of the autistic condition is severely flawed. Is everyone who is not completely oblivious to the world around them and everyone who has some moral reasoning autistic? Is that really what we want to point out as a condition to treat?

4