Jan 5, 2023·edited Jan 5, 2023Liked by Athena Walker
I very much like this post, Athena, thank you.
I had to figure some of this stuff out after my autism diagnosis about 6ish years ago. Silly me thought that "autism experts" might want to get the perspectives of autistic adults! HAHahahaha. heh.
Otoh, I have been glad to find a few people with lots of letters after their names, publishing studies that included actual autistic people in the design etc. of the research, as well as including some autistic researchers. They even refrain from labeling every autistic trait as a deficit!
I was shocked to find that many autism experts label my faster-than-normal reading a deficit; apparently I don't understand what I read, per the "experts"??? It's labeled "hyperlexia". Huh. OH that's just how I might have been at age 5 - but these researchers only study autistic kids 90%+ of the time, from the perspective that every difference is a deficit too. I used that ability to get through grad school etc.; my auditory comprehension is slow, so that's how I approach a lot of life. Visually. But only the negative part of that tradeoff is studied, last I looked. Nothing of why the little girl I was, loved visually searching for little berries on the mountain with my grandma is seen as a positive. It's all about getting autistic kids to make more eye contact. Circular assumptions, circular research, derogatory labels. Unfortunately (in this way) I'm not psychopathic; things really can bother me, so I stopped reading this garbage so much. How can autistic researchers survive this &*%*?
Autism doesn't seem associated with nearly the same fear as does psychopathy, yet there seems fear of our perspectives all the same. Perhaps it's partly that some cannot deal with the idea that their perspective is just an ephemeral set of mushy partly-logical neuronal firings taking place in the brain of an evolved monkey... Mine included of course.
A commonly repeated one... Apparently we autistics have defective "Theory of Mind", per such experts as the illustrious Simon Baron-Cohen. Since we don't understand NT minds as easily as NTs do, this must mean that we cannot understand other minds well. Period. But wait, you might ask... Might we understand some autistic minds better than NTs? Do NTs actually understand minds different from their own, or do they also fail to cross these divides? Might it be... a "Double Empathy Problem"?? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_empathy_problem) Some researchers do think so, beginning with an autistic researcher. To his credit, Baron-Cohen seems to be considering this alternative framework. It's looking like this all might be a two-way street, with NTs also having trouble understanding many things about non-NT thinking; there are still loads of researchers, clinicians, and regular people who just repeat the 20-year-old stuff about our defective brains though.
I have been wondering if part of the unspoken stuff in that, is that some NTs implicitly believe that their sort of mind is the only sort of possible intelligence; any deviation from that is defective, so why even worry about whether NTs can understand defective minds? It's not a two-way street in their minds; the universe revolves around them, they (NTs) were made in the ultimate deity's image, and all that. I wonder - do they feel that their Gods are NT? Perhaps it is an underlying assumption. Oh well. Thank you for reading if you got through all that.
My favorite autism journal, for anyone interested: "Autism in Adulthood"
I think most people who follow your posts are interested in psychopathy, but aware that there is a huge gap in the knowledge and theories, because most of these studies were done on criminals in prison. I bet there are a lot of PHD's following your posts, or would be if they were aware of them. From what I've seen, most of the experts seem to admit so much of psychopathy is really not well understood. Dr. Fallon's book went a long way to opening eyes and expanding thinking. I think many anthropologists now recognize that Mother Nature wants human populations to have a certain percentage of psychopathic brains. The percentage, we're told, is the same within all regions of the globe. So it's driven by evolutionary purpose to have that percentage.
But outside of prisoners, most psychopaths, I think, wisely remain in the shadows. What advantage in coming out? And few psychopaths see a need to visit a shrink. So we know they're there, but how they think remains a mystery.
That's why your posts are valuable and I think the audience will grow. It would probably really take off if you started a YT channel.
There are some “experts” who know nothing about specific topics on their field. I’m not criticizing them for that, as we are humans and it’s impossible that we know it all. My issue, however, is the arrogance that sometimes comes with it. This hits home right now.
My psychiatrist diagnosed me with something based on the most well known symptoms, so I started doing my own research. A little like you and psychopathy, I got to know my neurodivergence better than him; after all, I AM the one who experiences it everyday. The other day on my consult with him, he not only showed a complete lack of understanding as to how my brain works, but dared to basically tell me that I didn’t know anything. I got angry when I explained a couple of times but he dismissed me completely, because HE was the expert, not me.
Sorry, but having an alphabet soup after your name is NOT a guarantee that you know it all, and feeling like you do only creates a false sense of “security” where you stop learning and your confirmation bias makes you dismiss altogether everything that doesn’t support your previous knowledge.
I am worried, though. Because I knew that what he was saying wasn’t the truth thanks to my own research and my lived experience, but if I didn’t know better, if this had happened when I was younger, I would’ve felt like shit (the doc was basically telling me that I wasn’t trying hard enough to be neurotypical, so my hardships were MY fault). Because if I weren’t used to doing my own research and taking almost everything with a grain of salt, I would’ve blindly trusted him (he’s the expert!) and I would’ve felt stupid and useless. I would’ve blamed myself for everything.
So yeah, don’t trust “experts”. But also, silencing them is not the best course of action. We really don’t want to live in a world where someone can decide what is the truth and silence everyone who disagrees.
A few years back, I took some science courses and one of the first things they teach you is about the scientific method and how to properly conduct research. They also went on about biases and how they can affect the results of a study. The thing is, as human beings we are riddled with biases and this can affect how researchers carry out studies. A good researcher will recognize this and find ways to mitigate their own biases or if they're unable to just not do the research. This is also why the peer review process is vital in academia.
That being said, as with every single organization in human society, how members of said group are suppose to behave is not necessarily how the members are going to behave, and plenty of research papers have emotionally laden language that is not suppose to be there or is clearly the result of cultural biases.
What this means is that, if the scientific method and review process are taught at the introductory level, and researchers who have been in the field for years makes these kinds of errors, then they're either willfully ignorant or they just don't know.
Great article. The harm caused by "expert" arrogance and misinformation is significant. Psychology is not science in most instances. And the dsm is overwhelmingly opinion, drummed up to try to make it look like science and on a par with medical specialties. Then there is popular culture and the influence of social media and the internet which convince susceptible users that they have been victims of "narcissistic abuse" or "psychopathic manipulation" or any number of made up diagnoses. Its not your fault you are a loser. You don't have to take responsibility and be accountable for your own behavior and its consequences. You are a victim. A psychotherapist or mental health professional with an m.a. ph.d m.s.w. b.a. whatever will guide you through your victimhood and make you feel better cuz it wasn't your fault. cha-ching $$$.
Neurodivergency is not disorder or illness or defect. It doesn't necessarily have to be fixed. Understood, most certainly. And assistance, if needed, to exist in an nt world and contribute to the fullest extent of your sometimes remarkable abilities.
Thank you, Athena. Great topic, and discussion. Generally, I think that most people want to know the truth, although they tend to lean towards their biases. But, there are also many wouldbe academics who are outright frauds. I'm thinking of people like Elizabeth Holmes, and Dr. Andrew Wakefield who wrote the Lancet article blaming the MMR vaccine for autism, to name just two. There are still believers in Wakefield's fraudulent research. Afterall, The Lancet is a reputable medical journal. Unfortunately, clinging stubbornly to disproven ideas can injure all of us. There are people in other academic fields, like economics, who will die on the hill of their favorite school of thought rather than concede that those theories don't really work in the real world, or only work for a few, or have unintended consequences which are unacceptable. The Dalai Lama said, “If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change.” That's the ideal approach to knowledge, I think.
Hey kevin: Athena replied below as you see. She writes of the substantial commitment of time (days) and money (more than $4000) borne by her for a diagnostical determination.
This is far more than evaluation of a simple MRI picture of a brain.
With Athena's permission, I wish to say more:
I'm under the impression MRI shows the brain of psychopaths in a definitive way, as wired differently, than NTs.
Does this have value- to the researchers- from their perspective?
Please excuse my inartful use of English symbols. Reading is like driving: We don't think about the process until we try to do something new.
If the MRI picture, to build a database of "brain wiring" has value, we might be better served to ask those in hospital waiting rooms, than transport prisoners to the machines.
I hope you as fascinated by the prospects as I am. It is quite possible we live in a rather dark ages of sorts. Best wishes to you in everything.
As always, spot on. I absolutely love reading everything you write. Your ability to cut through the noise and spell things out as they are is extremely admirable.
I have always felt that the whole point of science is to attempt to understand our world and use that knowledge to benefit us; I also feel that there are too many people who seem to miss the part about science being an attempt to understand. When beliefs are dogmatic and /shall not be questioned/, it’s a religion, not an ever-evolving quest for knowledge. Too many people treat “science” like a religion, and “scientists” are their gods.
I don’t see the harm in asking questions. A scientist should encourage others to investigate their theories and welcome challenge. That’s how we grow and learn.
Hey. Vitamin D could be a really tricky thing to measure, idk. It seems some invasive to use a blood test each time.
Even in Winter, sunlight, especially between 10 am and 2 pm, should give you some naturally manufactured D. You don't have to be outside: Only where the sun hits you directly on as much skin surface as you can arrange.
It seems there is some recent evidence that people who died from Covid were far more likely to be low in D: AND it seems about 25% USA pop is D deficient.
The whole thing seems barbaric to me. One day, an entire range of health indicators and tests will be readily available. It appears we are in the grip of "profit motive" and industry of health care and insurance.
I generally agree. However, what about a situation where the president of the United States is propagating information that is demonstrably dangerous to human life, e.g. that drinking Clorox is effective as a "cure" for COVID, or that wearing masks or taking COVID vaccinations is dangerous to human health?
I mean, rational people may see through this immediately and know to ignore it, but what about the nearly 50% of the US population who are functionally illiterate (defined as having a reading level below the standard for 5th grade), and therefore lack the skills needed to determine independently whether the information being given is or is not dangerous to human health?
These people listen to authority figures because they don't really have any way to find things out independently. And I would say that "the powers that be" have a vested interest in the educational system being what it is, so that those who "should be kept in their place" in fact stay in that place. The result is that the literacy problem is now so serious that no one really knows what to do about it.
So, if we see that people are dying because they took some authority figure's advice, should that authority figure not be deplatformed and held criminally responsible for their deaths?
I very much like this post, Athena, thank you.
I had to figure some of this stuff out after my autism diagnosis about 6ish years ago. Silly me thought that "autism experts" might want to get the perspectives of autistic adults! HAHahahaha. heh.
Otoh, I have been glad to find a few people with lots of letters after their names, publishing studies that included actual autistic people in the design etc. of the research, as well as including some autistic researchers. They even refrain from labeling every autistic trait as a deficit!
I was shocked to find that many autism experts label my faster-than-normal reading a deficit; apparently I don't understand what I read, per the "experts"??? It's labeled "hyperlexia". Huh. OH that's just how I might have been at age 5 - but these researchers only study autistic kids 90%+ of the time, from the perspective that every difference is a deficit too. I used that ability to get through grad school etc.; my auditory comprehension is slow, so that's how I approach a lot of life. Visually. But only the negative part of that tradeoff is studied, last I looked. Nothing of why the little girl I was, loved visually searching for little berries on the mountain with my grandma is seen as a positive. It's all about getting autistic kids to make more eye contact. Circular assumptions, circular research, derogatory labels. Unfortunately (in this way) I'm not psychopathic; things really can bother me, so I stopped reading this garbage so much. How can autistic researchers survive this &*%*?
Autism doesn't seem associated with nearly the same fear as does psychopathy, yet there seems fear of our perspectives all the same. Perhaps it's partly that some cannot deal with the idea that their perspective is just an ephemeral set of mushy partly-logical neuronal firings taking place in the brain of an evolved monkey... Mine included of course.
A commonly repeated one... Apparently we autistics have defective "Theory of Mind", per such experts as the illustrious Simon Baron-Cohen. Since we don't understand NT minds as easily as NTs do, this must mean that we cannot understand other minds well. Period. But wait, you might ask... Might we understand some autistic minds better than NTs? Do NTs actually understand minds different from their own, or do they also fail to cross these divides? Might it be... a "Double Empathy Problem"?? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_empathy_problem) Some researchers do think so, beginning with an autistic researcher. To his credit, Baron-Cohen seems to be considering this alternative framework. It's looking like this all might be a two-way street, with NTs also having trouble understanding many things about non-NT thinking; there are still loads of researchers, clinicians, and regular people who just repeat the 20-year-old stuff about our defective brains though.
I have been wondering if part of the unspoken stuff in that, is that some NTs implicitly believe that their sort of mind is the only sort of possible intelligence; any deviation from that is defective, so why even worry about whether NTs can understand defective minds? It's not a two-way street in their minds; the universe revolves around them, they (NTs) were made in the ultimate deity's image, and all that. I wonder - do they feel that their Gods are NT? Perhaps it is an underlying assumption. Oh well. Thank you for reading if you got through all that.
My favorite autism journal, for anyone interested: "Autism in Adulthood"
https://home.liebertpub.com/publications/autism-in-adulthood/646
I think most people who follow your posts are interested in psychopathy, but aware that there is a huge gap in the knowledge and theories, because most of these studies were done on criminals in prison. I bet there are a lot of PHD's following your posts, or would be if they were aware of them. From what I've seen, most of the experts seem to admit so much of psychopathy is really not well understood. Dr. Fallon's book went a long way to opening eyes and expanding thinking. I think many anthropologists now recognize that Mother Nature wants human populations to have a certain percentage of psychopathic brains. The percentage, we're told, is the same within all regions of the globe. So it's driven by evolutionary purpose to have that percentage.
But outside of prisoners, most psychopaths, I think, wisely remain in the shadows. What advantage in coming out? And few psychopaths see a need to visit a shrink. So we know they're there, but how they think remains a mystery.
That's why your posts are valuable and I think the audience will grow. It would probably really take off if you started a YT channel.
There are some “experts” who know nothing about specific topics on their field. I’m not criticizing them for that, as we are humans and it’s impossible that we know it all. My issue, however, is the arrogance that sometimes comes with it. This hits home right now.
My psychiatrist diagnosed me with something based on the most well known symptoms, so I started doing my own research. A little like you and psychopathy, I got to know my neurodivergence better than him; after all, I AM the one who experiences it everyday. The other day on my consult with him, he not only showed a complete lack of understanding as to how my brain works, but dared to basically tell me that I didn’t know anything. I got angry when I explained a couple of times but he dismissed me completely, because HE was the expert, not me.
Sorry, but having an alphabet soup after your name is NOT a guarantee that you know it all, and feeling like you do only creates a false sense of “security” where you stop learning and your confirmation bias makes you dismiss altogether everything that doesn’t support your previous knowledge.
I am worried, though. Because I knew that what he was saying wasn’t the truth thanks to my own research and my lived experience, but if I didn’t know better, if this had happened when I was younger, I would’ve felt like shit (the doc was basically telling me that I wasn’t trying hard enough to be neurotypical, so my hardships were MY fault). Because if I weren’t used to doing my own research and taking almost everything with a grain of salt, I would’ve blindly trusted him (he’s the expert!) and I would’ve felt stupid and useless. I would’ve blamed myself for everything.
So yeah, don’t trust “experts”. But also, silencing them is not the best course of action. We really don’t want to live in a world where someone can decide what is the truth and silence everyone who disagrees.
A few years back, I took some science courses and one of the first things they teach you is about the scientific method and how to properly conduct research. They also went on about biases and how they can affect the results of a study. The thing is, as human beings we are riddled with biases and this can affect how researchers carry out studies. A good researcher will recognize this and find ways to mitigate their own biases or if they're unable to just not do the research. This is also why the peer review process is vital in academia.
That being said, as with every single organization in human society, how members of said group are suppose to behave is not necessarily how the members are going to behave, and plenty of research papers have emotionally laden language that is not suppose to be there or is clearly the result of cultural biases.
What this means is that, if the scientific method and review process are taught at the introductory level, and researchers who have been in the field for years makes these kinds of errors, then they're either willfully ignorant or they just don't know.
It's always better to know what people think even if you really don't like what they say about it.
Great article. The harm caused by "expert" arrogance and misinformation is significant. Psychology is not science in most instances. And the dsm is overwhelmingly opinion, drummed up to try to make it look like science and on a par with medical specialties. Then there is popular culture and the influence of social media and the internet which convince susceptible users that they have been victims of "narcissistic abuse" or "psychopathic manipulation" or any number of made up diagnoses. Its not your fault you are a loser. You don't have to take responsibility and be accountable for your own behavior and its consequences. You are a victim. A psychotherapist or mental health professional with an m.a. ph.d m.s.w. b.a. whatever will guide you through your victimhood and make you feel better cuz it wasn't your fault. cha-ching $$$.
Neurodivergency is not disorder or illness or defect. It doesn't necessarily have to be fixed. Understood, most certainly. And assistance, if needed, to exist in an nt world and contribute to the fullest extent of your sometimes remarkable abilities.
Thank you, Athena. Great topic, and discussion. Generally, I think that most people want to know the truth, although they tend to lean towards their biases. But, there are also many wouldbe academics who are outright frauds. I'm thinking of people like Elizabeth Holmes, and Dr. Andrew Wakefield who wrote the Lancet article blaming the MMR vaccine for autism, to name just two. There are still believers in Wakefield's fraudulent research. Afterall, The Lancet is a reputable medical journal. Unfortunately, clinging stubbornly to disproven ideas can injure all of us. There are people in other academic fields, like economics, who will die on the hill of their favorite school of thought rather than concede that those theories don't really work in the real world, or only work for a few, or have unintended consequences which are unacceptable. The Dalai Lama said, “If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change.” That's the ideal approach to knowledge, I think.
Was that a trick false statement Athena?
The Earth DOES revolve in an elliptical orbit around the Sun, doesn’t it?
OMG so well said.
I love it 😍.
"There is more religion in science, than science in religion."
-Henry David Thoreau.
Hey kevin: Athena replied below as you see. She writes of the substantial commitment of time (days) and money (more than $4000) borne by her for a diagnostical determination.
This is far more than evaluation of a simple MRI picture of a brain.
With Athena's permission, I wish to say more:
I'm under the impression MRI shows the brain of psychopaths in a definitive way, as wired differently, than NTs.
Does this have value- to the researchers- from their perspective?
Please excuse my inartful use of English symbols. Reading is like driving: We don't think about the process until we try to do something new.
If the MRI picture, to build a database of "brain wiring" has value, we might be better served to ask those in hospital waiting rooms, than transport prisoners to the machines.
I hope you as fascinated by the prospects as I am. It is quite possible we live in a rather dark ages of sorts. Best wishes to you in everything.
As always, spot on. I absolutely love reading everything you write. Your ability to cut through the noise and spell things out as they are is extremely admirable.
I have always felt that the whole point of science is to attempt to understand our world and use that knowledge to benefit us; I also feel that there are too many people who seem to miss the part about science being an attempt to understand. When beliefs are dogmatic and /shall not be questioned/, it’s a religion, not an ever-evolving quest for knowledge. Too many people treat “science” like a religion, and “scientists” are their gods.
I don’t see the harm in asking questions. A scientist should encourage others to investigate their theories and welcome challenge. That’s how we grow and learn.
Great Work!! Your rest and well being of the recent holiday looks good on you!!
I love this: "Once a bad idea is established, an entire field of study will be built on that bad idea." !!!
hahaha!!!!
May I suggest two "bad ideas"?
"Big Bang Theory". Please. However, try saying that and NOT hearing immediately something about "God"
"Our Bodies lack Design". Oh, my!! Say this and see how fast you are thrown to the lions... like other Christians!! hahaha.
Am I on the wrong track? Did I miss your message?
The blackness of my heart is so dark, I offer what mass murderers think as they commit their crimes!! haha.
Yet, for me to question "Big Bang" and "Evolutionist", can ONLY be explained that I am a Christian 'Evangel' pointing you to Jesus!
These two ideas seem to be locked in place, in the same way as Hare: By grants, salaries, book deals, reputations, power and prestige.
They are not in any meaningful way open to examination by "commoners".
All my best Athena. 2023 is off to a great start.
Hey. Vitamin D could be a really tricky thing to measure, idk. It seems some invasive to use a blood test each time.
Even in Winter, sunlight, especially between 10 am and 2 pm, should give you some naturally manufactured D. You don't have to be outside: Only where the sun hits you directly on as much skin surface as you can arrange.
It seems there is some recent evidence that people who died from Covid were far more likely to be low in D: AND it seems about 25% USA pop is D deficient.
The whole thing seems barbaric to me. One day, an entire range of health indicators and tests will be readily available. It appears we are in the grip of "profit motive" and industry of health care and insurance.
I generally agree. However, what about a situation where the president of the United States is propagating information that is demonstrably dangerous to human life, e.g. that drinking Clorox is effective as a "cure" for COVID, or that wearing masks or taking COVID vaccinations is dangerous to human health?
I mean, rational people may see through this immediately and know to ignore it, but what about the nearly 50% of the US population who are functionally illiterate (defined as having a reading level below the standard for 5th grade), and therefore lack the skills needed to determine independently whether the information being given is or is not dangerous to human health?
These people listen to authority figures because they don't really have any way to find things out independently. And I would say that "the powers that be" have a vested interest in the educational system being what it is, so that those who "should be kept in their place" in fact stay in that place. The result is that the literacy problem is now so serious that no one really knows what to do about it.
So, if we see that people are dying because they took some authority figure's advice, should that authority figure not be deplatformed and held criminally responsible for their deaths?