Is Autism such a bad thing?

[Virtud Tierra]

Autism is just as productive to society as profound retardation or schizophrenia.

Which, considering John Nash, really isn't saying too much. Of course, this depends on what you mean by autism. I don't really consider the type of "autism" that Einstein and Newton were expected to have to be "real" autism, anyway.

Those people didn't have autism and I'd reject any revisionist notion that suggest he did. Asberger's is not Autism. Its, at best, a personality disorder along the lines of schizoids and avoidants.

Asperger.
And why do you disagree with the doctors ? They claim there exists a spectrum, with rain man on one side, and things like dyslexia on the other. I see no reason to be "offended" by the notion.

Eh, the more you learn about psychology, the more you realize its about as founded in reality as Phrenology. It is massive generalizations, rigid catagorization and wild guesses used to fish for an answer you want to hear.

Not to say psychology is complete quackery, but its pretty goddamn close.

[Kashindahar]

1. This is pretty much a good reason for not really taking her seriously on anything related to autism and vaccines.

No, that's not an ad hominem. I'm not saying that everything she says is automatically wrong. I'm saying that, if she's that ignorant on this subject, the chances that she actually has anything useful to say on the subject is so small that it's really not worth digging through a bunch of shit for the small chance of finding some gold.

Haven't read the thread, so I don't know if this has been addressed, but:

It is an ad hominem.

Does that mean that your argument is a fallacy?

No.

An ad hom isn't necessarily a fallacy, though most often it is.

For another example: Saying that the teachings of an unabashed out-and-out racist on racial tolerance shouldn't be followed because of the aforementioned racism is an ad hominem, but it's also, most likely, correct.

[Callisdrun]

I was diagnosed with Aspergers. I don't believe it's real, and I don't consider it a legitimate disease.

You were?

Hmmm... that would explain a lot.

[Blouman Empire]

Anyway, is Autism, taken as a whole, a bad thing, or is it something that could benefit society (assuming the stigmas were removed)?

If you can show how it is a benefit I may agree until then I say no it isn't a benefit for society or for people who have it.

And autism is a real thing regardless of this "vaccine theory" whatever that is.

[Blouman Empire]

No, that's not an ad hominem. I'm not saying that everything she says is automatically wrong. I'm saying that, if she's that ignorant on this subject, the chances that she actually has anything useful to say on the subject is so small that it's really not worth digging through a bunch of shit for the small chance of finding some gold.

Ever heard of the expression "Out of the mouths of fools and babes", UT?

[Blouman Empire]

I was diagnosed with Aspergers. I don't believe it's real, and I don't consider it a legitimate disease.

Maybe I should apply your line of thinking as you do to the mother of the OP.

[Blouman Empire]

Autism is just as productive to society as profound retardation or schizophrenia.

Which, considering John Nash, really isn't saying too much. Of course, this depends on what you mean by autism. I don't really consider the type of "autism" that Einstein and Newton were expected to have to be "real" autism, anyway.

There varying levels of autism, of course the fact that people like to spread some idea that Newton had autism looks like one of those revisionist "let's make a buck" ideas.