Minor point of clarification: It's noted that many autistic folks struggle with empathy. There are two dimensions to empathy, cognitive and affective. Cognitive is more about perspective taking, or reading the feelings / intentions of others, while affective is the ability to share/understand the emotions of others, and respond appropriately.
Putting aside that the two may overlap, it's often the cognitive aspect that challenges the autistic, leaving them susceptible to being tricked, or unable to pick up on, say, whether or not a person is interested in dating them.
I point this out b/c it's important that this deficiency isn't construed as simply a predisposition to acting like an unfeeling jerk. There are many layers to empathy, as well as the related concept of Theory of Mind.
> as well as the related concept of Theory of Mind.
On the topic of theory of mind and ASD, I think this is quite an interesting read: "Empirical Failures of the Claim That Autistic People Lack a Theory of Mind" – https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6959478/
"We conclude that the claim that autistic people lack a theory of mind is empirically questionable and societally harmful"
> it's often the cognitive aspect that challenges the autistic
Yes, that perfectly matches my experiences.
I have far too much affective empathy, but struggle with cognitive empathy and often unintentionally make enemies because I am too clumsy with my words and social interactions, and can't properly gauge social roles (such as when a person looks up to me and would be hurt to hear any criticism from me.)
It stings me when people repeat that I have no empathy at all, and I wish this was better understood by others. Thank you for pointing it out so eloquently.
(Only speaking for myself here, not others! All of us are very different.)
I'm curious if the supposed Theory of Mind impairments only apply when Autistic people theorize about Neurotypical minds, which are different from their own.
My guess is that when theorizing about another Autistic person mind, which is similar to their own, they might actually do quite well because they have their own mind to use as a base to work from, just like Neurotypical people have their own mind to use as a base when theorizing about another Neurotypical persons mind.
Similarly, I'd say your average neurotypical person would have difficulties theorizing about whats going on inside an Autistic persons mind.
If I'm right, then the difference in Theory of Mind in my view would be more of a difference than an fundamental impairment.
Put more simply, there is a big difference between the capacity to care about other people's feelings, and the capacity to understand them.
Some understand but do not care, whereas some care but do not understand. It dovetails really well with creativity but it can introduce many challenges in life.
> it's often the cognitive aspect that challenges the autistic
I strongly relate with this as a child. As I grew older my friends would often come to me for emotional advice, which I explain as having found an understanding of the patterns behind emotions. I still have no clue how my own emotions work, but I share that with everyone.
Sympathy vs empathy also adds another layer. If a certain event would cause me pain and that event happens to you, I can feel for you because I sympathize with your pain. This can easily pass as empathy. But if that same event would not cause me pain but it causes you pain, this can be difficult to resolve as it involves theory of mind which is often weak or missing in those with ASD.
I was reading this comment dozens of times while trying to understand its implications.
When reflecting on myself, I think I have problems with both cognitive and affective empathy. From my perspective it's hard to differ between those because I think a lot of what makes the "reactibility of a person" is intertwined and feels like a really complicated maze that needs exploration to find a potential solution.
The problem is though, that when you try to explore "this maze" in a situation; usually people get very upset for me behaving not in an appropriate manner. So I guess that it's very hard to figure out when these exploration parts are appropriate; and when they are not.
> leaving them susceptible to being tricked, or unable to pick up on, say, whether or not a person is interested in dating them.
A lot of times in life people tend to exploit your character; and even when you realize it's just friendship or a distanciated acquaintance relationship the hard part is still saying no when people ask for your help. Oh so often you help them; and when you need their help once for a little thing like helping you to move something around - years later - they're suddenly not your friends anymore.
I often think that what keeps my sanity intact is "keeping a score" subconsciously... how often I helped or made space for somebody; and how often they did. While this is the jerk part to other people; it's a necessity for me to not get exploited by others again.
It's interesting that you point out that the cognitive aspect is the part autistics struggle with, because my experience with autistic people (myself included) is that they tend to be adept at receiving the signal, but are unable to respond appropriately. For example, I find it obvious when someone is interested in what I'm saying, but I'm not sure what to do with that information (e.g. do I just stop? Switch subjects, which might lead to the same problem? Etc.).
Where did you find this information? I might be self-analysing wrongly, so it'd be helpful to know how one might reach the opposite conclusion.
"Empathy" in the business circles, the one we hear most about these days, means if a given person takes into account the (profit) goals of other people. It has nothing to do with emotions.
Would cognitive empathy not be prerequisite to affective empathy? How can you share in another person's emotions if you're not able to recognize them in the first place?
The first sentence rubs me the wrong way. The claim that you wouldn’t expect autism to be coupled with invention because it is a disability only makes sense because of the semantics of labeling autism necessarily a disability. Not to mention the slight to disabilities as a whole
One of my sons has Asperger syndrome. He's brilliant, happy, and has one of the sharpest senses of humor I've encountered. I'm not sure if his Asperger syndrome is a net positive or negative in his life, but it's certainly not a straight-up disability.
Perhaps the author was thinking about a strong form of Autism that pretty unequivocally makes life difficult?
So many of the traits that are bundled into the label autistic are on par with lactose intolerance.
Lactose intolerance in adults is something that the majority of our species lives with. It's only the Indo-European minority that can keep drinking cow's milk after puberty.
So, for example:
Eye contact aversion. Prevalent among autistics. But only a disability in cultures that equate it with dishonesty.
Inability to tolerate fluorescent lighting. Those damned things did not exist until what, 60 years ago? How is it a pathology to be averse to them.
I understand that sentiment, but I reckon it's better overall to emphasise the disadvantages, because that puts the focus on "things to improve", so to speak. Otherwise, if the focus lies 'too much' with the advantages (such as the ability to focus, which is not present in all individuals) it can be overlooked that autism has real (sometimes quite debilitating) disadvantages.
I think their intention was to capture the attention of their target audience. Their target audience typically thinks of autism as something that mostly hinders someone, rather than elevate / enable them.
Most (like 90% or more) autistic people are low functioning. But they are completely invisible to people like you. When you hear the word you think of the border line cases that fall under the label "high functioning autism".
But the author is not limiting himself to just these borderline cases.
I wonder how much this is autism and how much it is people with low trait agreeableness being diagnosed with autism for being "bad with people". Refusing to do rituals without a good explanation makes people think you are autistic, but it could just as well be that they are disagreeable by nature and don't do things just because people tell them to. And refusing to do things the way everyone else does them obviously helps you find new ways to do things.
I have trait agreeableness in the bottom 1st percentile.
I'm also diagnosed with ADHD which is often co-morbid with ASD.
I very much refuse to go along with a looooot of things just for the sake it. Anything steeped in tradition without a whole lot of logic to it gets met with mostly flat rejection. This has steadily increased as I've gotten older.
My mum used to be a special needs teacher and she kind of suspected I might be on the spectrum when I was a teenager. I've met people diagnosed with ASD whom I share a bunch of lived experience in common with. My step brother has a son whose diagnosed with ASD and he sort of indicated I show some signs of it. So, there are hints that maybe I am somewhere possibly the invisible end of the spectrum? Or maybe it's just my personality?
I read through Asperger's The Complete Guide. There are a few puzzle pieces which fit like ding ding ding. But there just aren't enough of them. And I watch things like Love On The Spectrum etc and I have had my share of difficulties perhaps but nowhere near what those people experience.
I've kinda tossed up getting a professional opinion about it multiple times. I just mostly feel like this is me and it's who I enjoy being. Perhaps my 20s were just one big development of coping mechanisms? My social skills just haven't really troubled me until this year. Mostly it's either workmates, long term friends who share my interests, or special interest groups where I have stuff in common with people. This year I had to take my son to a school thing where there were other parents and the only shared context was our children. It was very anxiety inducing and I just felt like I had nothing. My son wanted to stay longer but I panicked and I said we had to go home.
Autism diagnosis does not really focus on social interactions. Difficulties in social interaction are a side effect but it is not how they diagnose the condition.
Note that the author is reporting primarily on his own research, not all of which is uncontroversial. Cohen's assertions have mostly been anecdote-based, without a lot of support from formal studies, even to quantifying what this "Invention" faculty even is.
Cohen has tended to be a bit of a firebrand, and although he is given to overstating associations, it has usually pushed the field forward in crucial ways.
For something with such a large spectrum, it doesn't make sense to assign broad generalizations. The lack of empathy in particular is almost too close to implying criminality as a common occurrence. Code perhaps?
Some people play the social games more than others and if you're not interested in playing along, you're labelled as the 'other'. Then all of the negative stuff builds from there and it tends to become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Positive generalizations are harmful too, like it being a super power or you're going to be a wealthy inventor.
Autism would be just one factor among many for all of these things.
Please don't take this the wrong way, but there is a 3-to-1 male-to-female ratio in autism prevalence. Does this mean that males invent more things than females? Or is the percentage of people with autism too small to have an effect here?
While I was reading the ‘The Patterns Seekers’, managed to put together a basic concept of crowdsourcing patterns. I suppose this will look interesting eventually into a graph later. Here is a preview: https://why.social/default.aspx
Reminds me of Peter Thiel's view that autism is useful because it leads to less herd-like thinking/peer-pressure succumb-tion/mimesis. This aspect might be more important than the one this article puts forward i.e. that autists thinking itself lends itself better to being inventive.
+ I'm wary of these things being pop culture memes, and having weird expectations of people. 'Rain Man' all over again.
+ I wonder if people with these 'differences' really at the end of the day just have 'different viewpoints'.
If 'everyone' were autistic a person that we might consider to be 'normal' ... would literally be an 'empath' - someone with uncanny magical powers to read emotions. That person would probably seem 'innovative' for having such a worldview.
The research study behind the book is about autistic traits and not necessarily clinically diagnosed autism.
Yes it is a spectrum and yes you can be "high functioning" and have "milder symptoms" but it is way more than that.
Autism has a wide range of clinical subtypes and there are extremely debilitating ones.
At its worst, you have kids who are non-verbal and can't communicate. If they don't get therapy they can be become aggressive and violent as they get older. A screaming hitting 5 year old is far different than a screaming hitting 15 year old.
Spinning in circles, flapping, repetition, sensory issues, the requirement of definite routines. It's a whole different world and exhausting.
You can identify signs of autism as early as 18 months. At age 2 or 3 it can be reliably diagnosed. I've personally seen autistic non-verable young kids go through intensive therapy and develop into kids who can attend kindergarten or 1st grade.
What is really sad is that for the kids that don't get early intervention and where schools and states are not able to identify these kids. These kids end up with behavioral IEPs, might get kicked out of school and have no friends. Not that the kids necessarily want to play with other kids.
Also the UK is seriously behind in autism therapy services and while it is good to focus on positive traits that might be associated with autism it is not helpful to those who really need the help. And in many cases you need a lot of help. But if you invest when the kids are young you can really make a difference.
In the US, Obamacare really opened up services in the US and even then its hit or miss. For example, federal employees have no early intervention/autism coverage. And before that you had to go to specific states or school districts or be really rich to get any type of help. Even then it takes 6 months to get your kid in somewhere and the wait lists are huge as demand is so high.
Kids with autism basically need 1:1 therapy 8 hours a day with positive reinforcement either ABA, AVB etc... I am a fan of center based programs but you do need to find a good program.
Also I am not sure what Baron-Cohen is suggesting here but saying that there is a "scientific rationale" behind the kid flipping the light on and off or staring at the fireplace or a ceiling fan wondering how it is just nonsense. I mean maybe its true but did the kid tell you that? The kid is presumably not able to ask someone as to why the light turns on when he flicks the switch or if told, integrate the response. I think it is more consistent with the need for stimulation. Also his comment on a savant with autism is really not helpful. Savant syndrome is probably co-morbid with autism, development delay, and intellectual disability... but to say that's an autistic trait is just irresponsible.
His book is basically a generalization based on autistic traits focused on systematizing and pattern matching and guess what the major confounding variable is ... we are all humans. Humans are pattern matchers + more. We also all respond to stimulus/response. And even animals are pattern matchers.
Mental disabilities are mostly adaptations that have huge upside. Technology is exacerbating that upside. You can’t have a majority autistic society, but you want some of them around
> Mental disabilities are mostly adaptations that have huge upside.
There is extremely scant evidence to support this claim, and conversely, an enormous amount of evidence to disprove it.
The first part is questionable in its very premise. Mental disabilities as an adaptation? By what metric do you measure this? And having huge upsides? There aren't many upsides to someone being born severely mentally retarded. There aren't really even many upsides to severe autism.
For every "House, M.D." you're thinking of, there's another totally non-functional person who requires an enormous amount of caretaking.
You could believe this if you have only ever saw mental disabilities in movies. Pay a visit to an actual mental ward and I can guarantee it will change your perspective.
I think what you might be getting at is that having a minority of people with mental disabilities increases the overall diversity of thought within our species, which can sometimes prove beneficial. However, any given mental disability may not be beneficial for the individual.
So one explanation is that natural selection has found a balance that yields benefits for the group.
Where one is on a spectrum is key here. When you have high functioning autism or ADHD, sure, you think outside a box and provide a unique perspective, and there's a workplace you can bring that to. When you're too low functioning to hold a job, it's hard to see an upside.
[+] [-] PlugTunin|5 years ago|reply
Minor point of clarification: It's noted that many autistic folks struggle with empathy. There are two dimensions to empathy, cognitive and affective. Cognitive is more about perspective taking, or reading the feelings / intentions of others, while affective is the ability to share/understand the emotions of others, and respond appropriately.
Putting aside that the two may overlap, it's often the cognitive aspect that challenges the autistic, leaving them susceptible to being tricked, or unable to pick up on, say, whether or not a person is interested in dating them.
I point this out b/c it's important that this deficiency isn't construed as simply a predisposition to acting like an unfeeling jerk. There are many layers to empathy, as well as the related concept of Theory of Mind.
[+] [-] skissane|5 years ago|reply
On the topic of theory of mind and ASD, I think this is quite an interesting read: "Empirical Failures of the Claim That Autistic People Lack a Theory of Mind" – https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6959478/
"We conclude that the claim that autistic people lack a theory of mind is empirically questionable and societally harmful"
[+] [-] cirno|5 years ago|reply
Yes, that perfectly matches my experiences.
I have far too much affective empathy, but struggle with cognitive empathy and often unintentionally make enemies because I am too clumsy with my words and social interactions, and can't properly gauge social roles (such as when a person looks up to me and would be hurt to hear any criticism from me.)
It stings me when people repeat that I have no empathy at all, and I wish this was better understood by others. Thank you for pointing it out so eloquently.
(Only speaking for myself here, not others! All of us are very different.)
[+] [-] aussieguy1234|5 years ago|reply
My guess is that when theorizing about another Autistic person mind, which is similar to their own, they might actually do quite well because they have their own mind to use as a base to work from, just like Neurotypical people have their own mind to use as a base when theorizing about another Neurotypical persons mind.
Similarly, I'd say your average neurotypical person would have difficulties theorizing about whats going on inside an Autistic persons mind.
If I'm right, then the difference in Theory of Mind in my view would be more of a difference than an fundamental impairment.
[+] [-] epiphanitus|5 years ago|reply
Some understand but do not care, whereas some care but do not understand. It dovetails really well with creativity but it can introduce many challenges in life.
[+] [-] zamalek|5 years ago|reply
I strongly relate with this as a child. As I grew older my friends would often come to me for emotional advice, which I explain as having found an understanding of the patterns behind emotions. I still have no clue how my own emotions work, but I share that with everyone.
[+] [-] petercooper|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cookiengineer|5 years ago|reply
When reflecting on myself, I think I have problems with both cognitive and affective empathy. From my perspective it's hard to differ between those because I think a lot of what makes the "reactibility of a person" is intertwined and feels like a really complicated maze that needs exploration to find a potential solution.
The problem is though, that when you try to explore "this maze" in a situation; usually people get very upset for me behaving not in an appropriate manner. So I guess that it's very hard to figure out when these exploration parts are appropriate; and when they are not.
> leaving them susceptible to being tricked, or unable to pick up on, say, whether or not a person is interested in dating them.
A lot of times in life people tend to exploit your character; and even when you realize it's just friendship or a distanciated acquaintance relationship the hard part is still saying no when people ask for your help. Oh so often you help them; and when you need their help once for a little thing like helping you to move something around - years later - they're suddenly not your friends anymore.
I often think that what keeps my sanity intact is "keeping a score" subconsciously... how often I helped or made space for somebody; and how often they did. While this is the jerk part to other people; it's a necessity for me to not get exploited by others again.
[+] [-] rimiform|5 years ago|reply
Where did you find this information? I might be self-analysing wrongly, so it'd be helpful to know how one might reach the opposite conclusion.
[+] [-] k__|5 years ago|reply
I say to myself I can "understand it", but if I can't feel it, I didn't really understand anything.
[+] [-] bitL|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] yissp|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hiena03|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ksm1717|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] DoofusOfDeath|5 years ago|reply
Perhaps the author was thinking about a strong form of Autism that pretty unequivocally makes life difficult?
[+] [-] ocschwar|5 years ago|reply
Lactose intolerance in adults is something that the majority of our species lives with. It's only the Indo-European minority that can keep drinking cow's milk after puberty.
So, for example: Eye contact aversion. Prevalent among autistics. But only a disability in cultures that equate it with dishonesty.
[+] [-] rimiform|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chokeartist|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] konjin|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lumberjack|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] username90|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nullsense|5 years ago|reply
I'm also diagnosed with ADHD which is often co-morbid with ASD.
I very much refuse to go along with a looooot of things just for the sake it. Anything steeped in tradition without a whole lot of logic to it gets met with mostly flat rejection. This has steadily increased as I've gotten older.
My mum used to be a special needs teacher and she kind of suspected I might be on the spectrum when I was a teenager. I've met people diagnosed with ASD whom I share a bunch of lived experience in common with. My step brother has a son whose diagnosed with ASD and he sort of indicated I show some signs of it. So, there are hints that maybe I am somewhere possibly the invisible end of the spectrum? Or maybe it's just my personality?
I read through Asperger's The Complete Guide. There are a few puzzle pieces which fit like ding ding ding. But there just aren't enough of them. And I watch things like Love On The Spectrum etc and I have had my share of difficulties perhaps but nowhere near what those people experience.
I've kinda tossed up getting a professional opinion about it multiple times. I just mostly feel like this is me and it's who I enjoy being. Perhaps my 20s were just one big development of coping mechanisms? My social skills just haven't really troubled me until this year. Mostly it's either workmates, long term friends who share my interests, or special interest groups where I have stuff in common with people. This year I had to take my son to a school thing where there were other parents and the only shared context was our children. It was very anxiety inducing and I just felt like I had nothing. My son wanted to stay longer but I panicked and I said we had to go home.
So... At this point I don't really know.
[+] [-] akvadrako|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lumberjack|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] BlueTemplar|5 years ago|reply
> our ancestors started inventing things 70,000 to 100,000 years ago.
Erm, and what about the other 200k-230k years of homo sapiens?
Not to mention that Homo erectus invented the handaxe and domesticated fire about 1700k years ago, both of which were a pretty big deal!
https://tauromachy.org/2018/07/18/the-handaxe-the-thundersto...
[+] [-] cma|5 years ago|reply
And that modern humans had some kind of creativity explosion substantially after they were anatomically modern.
[+] [-] ajarmst|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] SubiculumCode|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] neonate|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Threeve303|5 years ago|reply
Some people play the social games more than others and if you're not interested in playing along, you're labelled as the 'other'. Then all of the negative stuff builds from there and it tends to become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Positive generalizations are harmful too, like it being a super power or you're going to be a wealthy inventor.
Autism would be just one factor among many for all of these things.
[+] [-] amelius|5 years ago|reply
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28545751/
[+] [-] Taniwha|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ddmma|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Shmebulock|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jariel|5 years ago|reply
+ I wonder if people with these 'differences' really at the end of the day just have 'different viewpoints'.
If 'everyone' were autistic a person that we might consider to be 'normal' ... would literally be an 'empath' - someone with uncanny magical powers to read emotions. That person would probably seem 'innovative' for having such a worldview.
[+] [-] junyoon|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] sjg007|5 years ago|reply
Yes it is a spectrum and yes you can be "high functioning" and have "milder symptoms" but it is way more than that.
Autism has a wide range of clinical subtypes and there are extremely debilitating ones.
At its worst, you have kids who are non-verbal and can't communicate. If they don't get therapy they can be become aggressive and violent as they get older. A screaming hitting 5 year old is far different than a screaming hitting 15 year old.
Spinning in circles, flapping, repetition, sensory issues, the requirement of definite routines. It's a whole different world and exhausting.
You can identify signs of autism as early as 18 months. At age 2 or 3 it can be reliably diagnosed. I've personally seen autistic non-verable young kids go through intensive therapy and develop into kids who can attend kindergarten or 1st grade.
What is really sad is that for the kids that don't get early intervention and where schools and states are not able to identify these kids. These kids end up with behavioral IEPs, might get kicked out of school and have no friends. Not that the kids necessarily want to play with other kids.
Also the UK is seriously behind in autism therapy services and while it is good to focus on positive traits that might be associated with autism it is not helpful to those who really need the help. And in many cases you need a lot of help. But if you invest when the kids are young you can really make a difference.
In the US, Obamacare really opened up services in the US and even then its hit or miss. For example, federal employees have no early intervention/autism coverage. And before that you had to go to specific states or school districts or be really rich to get any type of help. Even then it takes 6 months to get your kid in somewhere and the wait lists are huge as demand is so high.
Kids with autism basically need 1:1 therapy 8 hours a day with positive reinforcement either ABA, AVB etc... I am a fan of center based programs but you do need to find a good program.
https://www.autismspeaks.org/signs-autism
Also I am not sure what Baron-Cohen is suggesting here but saying that there is a "scientific rationale" behind the kid flipping the light on and off or staring at the fireplace or a ceiling fan wondering how it is just nonsense. I mean maybe its true but did the kid tell you that? The kid is presumably not able to ask someone as to why the light turns on when he flicks the switch or if told, integrate the response. I think it is more consistent with the need for stimulation. Also his comment on a savant with autism is really not helpful. Savant syndrome is probably co-morbid with autism, development delay, and intellectual disability... but to say that's an autistic trait is just irresponsible.
His book is basically a generalization based on autistic traits focused on systematizing and pattern matching and guess what the major confounding variable is ... we are all humans. Humans are pattern matchers + more. We also all respond to stimulus/response. And even animals are pattern matchers.
[+] [-] solarmist|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] solarmist|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] formk|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] SlipperySlope|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] golemotron|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] programmerslave|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cbozeman|5 years ago|reply
There is extremely scant evidence to support this claim, and conversely, an enormous amount of evidence to disprove it.
The first part is questionable in its very premise. Mental disabilities as an adaptation? By what metric do you measure this? And having huge upsides? There aren't many upsides to someone being born severely mentally retarded. There aren't really even many upsides to severe autism.
For every "House, M.D." you're thinking of, there's another totally non-functional person who requires an enormous amount of caretaking.
[+] [-] primroot|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] layoutIfNeeded|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pickpuck|5 years ago|reply
So one explanation is that natural selection has found a balance that yields benefits for the group.
[+] [-] galoisgirl|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cm2012|5 years ago|reply