Ok. It appears I wasn't clear enough in what I wrote. Psychologists, unlike laypeople, don't treat the DSM as some kind of bible. It's a collection of rules of

Ok. It appears I wasn't clear enough in what I wrote. Psychologists, unlike laypeople, don't treat the DSM as some kind of bible. It's a collection of rules of thumb used for helping diagnose various mental disorders. The fact that DSM 5 did away with a specific disorder is nothing like your example and says nothing whatsoever about whether a particular disorder exists or not. All they did was the equivalent of saying, "OK, we've got these grades from A1 to A5, and this other grade NG; maybe we should just call it A6 so it fits into the same general scale". When they say "it's not an evidence based term", they simply mean it's not worth distinguishing from the spectrum as a whole. Let me quote from the very article you quoted: > If these experts have their way, _Asperger's syndrome and another mild form of autism_, pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified (P.D.D.-N.O.S. for short), _will be folded into a single broad diagnosis_, autism spectrum disorder - a category that encompasses autism's entire range, or spectrum, from high-functioning to profoundly disabling. (Emphasis mine) Now, I'm not arguing whether it's a real thing or not. I leave that to people more knowledgeable in the field than I am. I'm arguing simply that your characterization of the term is incorrect and also doesn't agree with how psychologists view the term. > The proof that there's no such thing as Asperger's (as a mental illness) has two parts. One, anyone could get the diagnosis through the simple expedient of visiting a psychologist and saying, "I think I have Asperger's". I'm not sure how that "proves" anything? You've made a statement that something happens, but haven't actually provided any proof of anything. > Two, the number of wildly successful people who were said to have Asperger's, including Thomas Jefferson, Albert Einstein, and Bill Gates, which means if Asperger's is real, then wealth and fame are reliable diagnostic indicators for the condition. You appear not to understand the difference between correlation and causation, nor do you have a good grasp of probability distributions.