Which is a more accurate indicator of Autism??

[jalapeno]

How they post on the internet, or how someone talk in front of a camera or in public??

[TheMaestro]

This doesn't make any sense. Since I know you are trying you find out if you're an autist, go visit a doctor, I've seen you share many similarities with Mortimer, wierd way of talking etc.

[sean]

[JamesBond007]

AFAIK, since autism is defined in the DSM it is probably bullshit for malingerers. Except for a few objectively identifiable brain diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease, there are neither biological or chemical tests nor biopsy or necropsy findings for verifying or falsifying DSM diagnoses. Anything, that is non-falsifiable is not scientific. I once told a social worker that psychiatry was a pseudo-science and he said it was more of an art. The uneducated or unlearned are impressed with Latin words such as Schizophrenia. Baron Richard von Krafft-Ebing (1840–1902), was a contemporary of Charcot and older colleague of Freud. Krafft-Ebing was a German-born physician who was a professor of psychiatry, successively, at the Universities of Strasbourg, Graz, and Vienna. The work that made him world famous is Psychopathia Sexualis, the first edition of which appeared in 1886. Krafft-Ebing was an early practitioner of the art of transforming, with the aid of Latin and a medical diploma, behaviors considered sinful into sicknesses.To impress the medical character of his work on the profession and the public, Krafft-Ebing sprinkled his text liberally with Latin, and both he and his publisher maintained that Psychopathia Sexualis was intended only for medical professionals. The less people know what they are talking about, the more likely they are to mistake knowing a term for knowing something about the real world. The great physicist Richard Feynman wisely observed, “You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you’re finished, you’ll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird. You’ll only know about humans in different places, and what they call the bird. So let’s look at the bird and see what it’s doing—that’s what counts. I learned very early the difference between knowing the name of something and knowing something.” Mistaking knowing the name of something for knowing something is endemic in journalism, politics, and psychiatry.


Psychiatry is like 98% bullshit at least. Like I said there are no there are neither biological or chemical tests nor biopsy or necropsy findings for verifying or falsifying DSM diagnoses. According to classic, pathological-scientific criteria, disease is a product manufactured by the body, in the same sense that urine is. Diagnosis, in contrast, is a product manufactured by persons, in the same sense that works of art are. Charcot and Freud discarded the somatic pathological criterion of disease, destroying the empirical-rational basis for distinguishing real medical disorders of the body (diseases) from fake psychiatric disorders of the “mind” (nondiseases). Modern psychiatry is a gigantic edifice built on the poisoned ruins of this destruction.

[jalapeno]

This doesn't make any sense. Since I know you are trying you find out if you're an autist, go visit a doctor, I've seen you share many similarities with Mortimer, wierd way of talking etc.

He's actually diagnosed with Schizophrenia if I remember reading correctly

[PaleoEuropean]

See a psychologist and take a test, being a jackass or weirdo doesn't make you autistic.

[Jacques de Imbelloni]

Wouldn't it be awesome IF the state would pay you for acting like an idiot all day long?

[jalapeno]

AFAIK, since autism is defined in the DSM it is probably bullshit for malingerers. Except for a few objectively identifiable brain diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease, there are neither biological or chemical tests nor biopsy or necropsy findings for verifying or falsifying DSM diagnoses. Anything, that is non-falsifiable is not scientific. I once told a social worker that psychiatry was a pseudo-science and he said it was more of an art. The uneducated or unlearned are impressed with Latin words such as Schizophrenia. Baron Richard von Krafft-Ebing (1840–1902), was a contemporary of Charcot and older colleague of Freud. Krafft-Ebing was a German-born physician who was a professor of psychiatry, successively, at the Universities of Strasbourg, Graz, and Vienna. The work that made him world famous is Psychopathia Sexualis, the first edition of which appeared in 1886. Krafft-Ebing was an early practitioner of the art of transforming, with the aid of Latin and a medical diploma, behaviors considered sinful into sicknesses.To impress the medical character of his work on the profession and the public, Krafft-Ebing sprinkled his text liberally with Latin, and both he and his publisher maintained that Psychopathia Sexualis was intended only for medical professionals. The less people know what they are talking about, the more likely they are to mistake knowing a term for knowing something about the real world. The great physicist Richard Feynman wisely observed, “You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you’re finished, you’ll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird. You’ll only know about humans in different places, and what they call the bird. So let’s look at the bird and see what it’s doing—that’s what counts. I learned very early the difference between knowing the name of something and knowing something.” Mistaking knowing the name of something for knowing something is endemic in journalism, politics, and psychiatry.


Psychiatry is like 98% bullshit at least. Like I said there are no there are neither biological or chemical tests nor biopsy or necropsy findings for verifying or falsifying DSM diagnoses. According to classic, pathological-scientific criteria, disease is a product manufactured by the body, in the same sense that urine is. Diagnosis, in contrast, is a product manufactured by persons, in the same sense that works of art are. Charcot and Freud discarded the somatic pathological criterion of disease, destroying the empirical-rational basis for distinguishing real medical disorders of the body (diseases) from fake psychiatric disorders of the “mind” (nondiseases). Modern psychiatry is a gigantic edifice built on the poisoned ruins of this destruction.

AFAIK, since autism is defined in the DSM it is probably bullshit for malingerers. Except for a few objectively identifiable brain diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease, there are neither biological or chemical tests nor biopsy or necropsy findings for verifying or falsifying DSM diagnoses. Anything, that is non-falsifiable is not scientific. I once told a social worker that psychiatry was a pseudo-science and he said it was more of an art. The uneducated or unlearned are impressed with Latin words such as Schizophrenia. Baron Richard von Krafft-Ebing (1840–1902), was a contemporary of Charcot and older colleague of Freud. Krafft-Ebing was a German-born physician who was a professor of psychiatry, successively, at the Universities of Strasbourg, Graz, and Vienna. The work that made him world famous is Psychopathia Sexualis, the first edition of which appeared in 1886. Krafft-Ebing was an early practitioner of the art of transforming, with the aid of Latin and a medical diploma, behaviors considered sinful into sicknesses.To impress the medical character of his work on the profession and the public, Krafft-Ebing sprinkled his text liberally with Latin, and both he and his publisher maintained that Psychopathia Sexualis was intended only for medical professionals. The less people know what they are talking about, the more likely they are to mistake knowing a term for knowing something about the real world. The great physicist Richard Feynman wisely observed, “You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you’re finished, you’ll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird. You’ll only know about humans in different places, and what they call the bird. So let’s look at the bird and see what it’s doing—that’s what counts. I learned very early the difference between knowing the name of something and knowing something.” Mistaking knowing the name of something for knowing something is endemic in journalism, politics, and psychiatry.


Psychiatry is like 98% bullshit at least. Like I said there are no there are neither biological or chemical tests nor biopsy or necropsy findings for verifying or falsifying DSM diagnoses. According to classic, pathological-scientific criteria, disease is a product manufactured by the body, in the same sense that urine is. Diagnosis, in contrast, is a product manufactured by persons, in the same sense that works of art are. Charcot and Freud discarded the somatic pathological criterion of disease, destroying the empirical-rational basis for distinguishing real medical disorders of the body (diseases) from fake psychiatric disorders of the “mind” (nondiseases). Modern psychiatry is a gigantic edifice built on the poisoned ruins of this destruction.

That's why I seem to appreciate the field of 'Phenomenology' much more since it is less materialistic/brain-oriented and more to do with the actual study of the 'phenomena' as opposed to noumena:


Phenomenology deals with the heart of the actual issue/thought/idea/feeling.. that is the actual mental stuff disregarding anything material which may all be false materiality

[jalapeno]

The child for life LOLz

[Jacques de Imbelloni]

The less people know what they are talking about, the more likely they are to mistake knowing a term for knowing something about the real world.

Well put, you are confusing psychiatry a branch of medical sciences, with psychology, a social cience, and you are confusing the latter with Psychoanalysis, an actual pseudoscience.