4 ms·

I agree with the OP's point about not painting the whole spectrum with the same brush - but personally I don't have an issue calling extreme autism a disease -

I agree with the OP's point about not painting the whole spectrum with the same brush - but personally I don't have an issue calling extreme autism a disease - people who have that usually can't speak and often can't feed themselves - that doesn't really have an equivalent in your analogies.

brookst 4y ago
I think I did a poor job explaining. The key point is that, if “extreme autism” is a disease, that doesn’t mean all autism is a disease. To improve my example, it’s like describing left-handedness as a disease because a small percentage of lefties experience extreme left-handedness where they can’t use their right hand at all.
andai 4y ago
It's similar with other traits. Being more aggressive than average might increase your success in life, but if you have too much you will get in trouble. Another way to look at it is that some traits are harmful for the individual but beneficial for the group. Insomnia does a number on your health, but the tribe wants someone to jump at every cracking of a twig in the night, just in case it's something bad.
- saalweachter 4y ago
  I mean, we also call extreme aggressive tendencies a mental illness or disorder. In general, the standard in mental illnesses is that in order for a diagnosis to be made, the condition must interfere with leading a fulfilling life; a narcissist is only diagnosed with NPD if their narcissism prevents them from achieving their goals in life (hold down a job, maintain relationships, etc).
nicoburns 4y ago
> but personally I don't have an issue calling extreme autism a disease - people who have that usually can't speak and often can't feed themselves - that doesn't really have an equivalent in your analogies. People who take issue with autism being described as a disease would generally believe that most autistic people live close-to-normal lives and simply aren't recognised as being autistic. This comes back to the question of whether there ought to be a separate label for those who are severely disabled by their cognitive differences vs. those who are more able to function in general society despite similar cognitive differences. But it does seem to be the case that there is a large subgroup of society that thinks qualitatively differently to the general population (but similarly to each other), has to work hard to compensate for that in order to fit in, and often has social and mental health difficulties both due to the effort of maintaining that facade and because of the backlash they get when they fail to consistently do so.
- jklinger410 4y ago
  > whether there ought to be a separate label for those who are severely disabled by their cognitive differences vs. those who are more able to function in general society despite similar cognitive differences There is no debate, the answer to this is yes.

brookst 4y ago

I think I did a poor job explaining. The key point is that, if “extreme autism” is a disease, that doesn’t mean all autism is a disease. To improve my example, it’s like describing left-handedness as a disease because a small percentage of lefties experience extreme left-handedness where they can’t use their right hand at all.

andai 4y ago

It's similar with other traits. Being more aggressive than average might increase your success in life, but if you have too much you will get in trouble. Another way to look at it is that some traits are harmful for the individual but beneficial for the group. Insomnia does a number on your health, but the tribe wants someone to jump at every cracking of a twig in the night, just in case it's something bad.

saalweachter 4y ago
I mean, we also call extreme aggressive tendencies a mental illness or disorder. In general, the standard in mental illnesses is that in order for a diagnosis to be made, the condition must interfere with leading a fulfilling life; a narcissist is only diagnosed with NPD if their narcissism prevents them from achieving their goals in life (hold down a job, maintain relationships, etc).

nicoburns 4y ago

> but personally I don't have an issue calling extreme autism a disease - people who have that usually can't speak and often can't feed themselves - that doesn't really have an equivalent in your analogies. People who take issue with autism being described as a disease would generally believe that most autistic people live close-to-normal lives and simply aren't recognised as being autistic. This comes back to the question of whether there ought to be a separate label for those who are severely disabled by their cognitive differences vs. those who are more able to function in general society despite similar cognitive differences. But it does seem to be the case that there is a large subgroup of society that thinks qualitatively differently to the general population (but similarly to each other), has to work hard to compensate for that in order to fit in, and often has social and mental health difficulties both due to the effort of maintaining that facade and because of the backlash they get when they fail to consistently do so.

jklinger410 4y ago
> whether there ought to be a separate label for those who are severely disabled by their cognitive differences vs. those who are more able to function in general society despite similar cognitive differences There is no debate, the answer to this is yes.