Thread by @KaydenStockwell

🧵. I listened to @sbaroncohen (SBC), @stevesilberman (SS), and @AutisticEnough’s (CG) conversation on SBC’s new book The Pattern Seekers. This thread is from notes and quotes taken from watching the replay: crowdcast.io/e/a-conversati… (1/45... I think)

This is not exhaustive, because that would be exhausting. I’ve skipped some parts and some quotes are condensed b/c character limits. Trying not to lose nuance/context by deleting too much, this will also likely be a very long thread. I hope you’ll stick with it. /2

I also know there are a lot of strong opinions around this book and the author. Just because I’m tweeting this doesn’t mean I agree with everything said in it, but I thought those that didn’t attend might be interested and I’m interested in Twitter’s opinions. /3

We start with SS noting “one of the most important developments in recent years is autistic people demanding a place at the table when autism is being discussed”. Noting that SS thinks it important that they “walk the talk” and invited CG to join them for this conversation. /4

SBC says “It’s true that some autistic people demand to have a voice. But equally, it’s for any of us who are writing about autism, talking about autism. The responsibility is on us to make sure autistic people are included.” /5

SS’s first question is about SBC’s 2017 address to the UN “Autism and Human Rights”. SBC chose this title because “it’s increasingly evident that autistic people are falling outside the basic human rights.” /6

SS: “Chilling how dehumanized autistic people were by people like Ivar Lovass. They really did not give the recognition that autistic people were even human beings”. /7

SBC notes The Pattern Seekers ends in a “call to action to address some of the very fundamental inequalities that still exist towards autistic people, like the fact that the majority of autistic adults are unemployed and have very poor mental health as a result”. /8

CG brings up the important point of stereotypes about what jobs are most suitable for autistic people and what jobs tend to be seen as off-limits. /9

She also addresses what I at least have noticed as a common criticism of the premise of the book. “If you think of us only in terms of what we can produce to enhance the gross national product, then you essentially commodify us [autistics]...” /10

SBC responds that commodifying autistic people would be a bad outcome (though, in my opinion, this is sometimes what targeted hiring programs seem to be doing). Purpose of increasing employment is to give autistics opportunities to like autonomy and a sense of purpose. /11

Moving on, SS says that the book is somewhat of an extension of a pattern SBC noticed in the 1990s when he wrote a paper called “Is There a Link Between Engineering and Autism?” (link to paper, not open access but DM me: tinyurl.com/ybja44nh) /12

SBC notes the big idea of The Pattern Seekers is to ask the question: Is there a link between autism and the very human capacity for invention? It argues that invention relies on pattern seeking, specifically If And Then type thinking similar to boolean logic. /13

From SBC’s research, they found that autistics generally perform better on tests of understanding how systems work and being able to spot If And Then patterns. Example: If I blow on this hollow bird done And I plug this hole Then I get X sound. /14

CG has been practicing: “If I can use that [pattern] to communicate with non-autistics And we understand that I have a natural difficulty in communicating with non-autistics Then perhaps non-autistics will have an easier time understanding me…” /15

CG thinks this is an interesting idea, to take this idea of pattern noticing from unconscious to conscious as a way to reach out to non-autistics. /16

SBC calls this If And Then logic systemizing: understanding a system in terms of its rules. Gives an example of an autistic kid who is passionate about light switches and has them all on. If someone moves one to off, the person might become quite upset. /17

CG points out if you walk into a physicist's lab and interrupt her experiments, she’ll get (rightfully, imo) upset and that is what is happening when you change the light switch in this example. /18

SBC notes in the past, clinicians would try to stop repetitive behaviors (I’d argue still do…). Says the book argues that no, “this is how autistic people learn and spot patterns in the world and sometimes those patterns could be very valuable”. /19

SS was relieved to see the book doesn’t limit systematizing thinking to STEM, but can extend to arts, music, etc. SBC says you might note an autistic who says they’re not good at math but may take a very systematic approach to other areas of life such as cooking or music. /20

SBC discusses a study of 600k people given measures of systemizing, empathy, and AQ. I asked in the chat: Nick Chown has written about autistic traits and the potential misuse of the concept (Are the “autistic traits” and “broader autism phenotype” concepts real or mythical) /21

Chown states "In other words, there is no single behaviour... displayed by the autistic person that can’t be seen in [non-autistic people].” Is this just semantics? Or should we be considering how we talk and conceptualize "autistic traits"? My Q wasn’t selected 21/x

I, like many, have thoughts on the AQ. I get stuck in a circular loop of, many of Qs seem based on stereotypes, which then inform diagnosticians’ stereotypes, that inform stereotypes autistic people may have/hear, which may impact how AQ is answered, etc etc. Anyways… /22

SS brings up Dr. Treffert who studied savant abilities. He intro’d SS to jazz musician Matt Savage. Treffert intro’d Matt as a rarity, a savant who could think creatively. “Notion that savants could not think creatively came out of some of the work that you did, Simon” /23

SBC talks about how pattern seeking and systemizing is on a bell curve. Most people are average, autistics in that large study tend to score above this average in interest in patterns. “We all have autistic traits, autistic[s] just have more of them than the rest of us” /24

SBC: “We all empathize to different degrees, too.” In the study, used these scores to create profiles, Type E[mpathizing] and Type S[ystemizing]. Sees as example of neurodiversity. Says neurodiversity isn’t just diagnosed people, it’s that we all have different brains. /25

SBC: “We have to acknowledge differences and respect that one isn’t better or worse. We just have different patterns, different profiles.” /26

SS asks about anxiety. In book, SBC theorizes anxiety in autistics may relate to difficulty systematizing relationships as reliably as other systems. SBC thinks a lot of anxiety and poor mental health in autistics is to do with lack of support, stigma, and trauma. /27

CG says things get problematic because of the whole empathy question. In her opinion, SBC has gone to great lengths to distinguish between the two types of empathy. /28

Cognitive Empathy (CE) “ability to imagine what someone else is thinking/feeling”. Affective Empathy (AE) “having an emotional experience that’s appropriate to someone else’s thoughts and feelings”. CG notes SBC says AE is "relatively unimpaired" in autistics opposed to CE. /29

CG asks “When u are testing amount of empathy, which type are u testing?” SBC says depends on test. His group developed the Eyes test. Autistics tend to score lower than non-autistics on this, which is CE in his opinion. Mentions importance of not relying on a single test. /30

CG brings up trouble reading cues (CE) with non-autistics but not autistics. AE made her think of @milton_damian’s Double Empathy Problem. Notes she sees emotion but not responding at “appropriate” level. “Not that it [AE] is unimpaired, that it’s overdrive all the time.” /31

CG wrote in margins as read book “poor Simon” as he’s oft-criticized for saying autistics lack empathy but CG doesn’t think he’s ever actually said that. Misunderstandings around concept of empathy (imo, there is quite a divide between academic and colloquial use of empathy) /32

SBC returns to CG’s point on autistics potentially finding it easier to communicate with other autistics Asks if that is due to communication style as non-autistics often don’t say what they mean/don’t mean what they say, so perhaps autistic communication is clearer? /33

CG says autistics know how to listen to each other. For all the time that non-autistics spend trying to get autistics to speak better, most non-autistics don’t bother to learn how to listen to autistics, especially non-speakers. /34

SBC thinks “What @milton_damian has highlighted goes back to including autistic people in the conversation. The non-autistic world may not be making the effort to empathize with autistic people… autistic people are being excluded and that shows a lack of empathy by society.” /35

Almost out of time, SS moves to audience Qs.”“how the book addresses the issue of what social development opportunities are missed for humanity as a whole by excluding diverse groups, and autistics specifically, in innovation systems, institutions, disciplines, etc?” /36

CG points out the diverse groups include LGBTQ+ people, groups that seem to be skipped in our binary way of thinking. “We are less binary than we ever thought we were, that we are more fluid than we ever thought we were in terms of race and gender.” /37

SBC says we can think about people who need a diagnosis of autism, ADHD, dyslexia, etc OR about people who, generally, think differently. Education system assumes we all learn in one, optimal way. Our school system doesn’t address the needs of diversity. /38

SS mentions idea from book that more systemizing thinkers may need to be taught differently. SBC: “For a kid who has passions, used to be called obsessions, why shouldn’t we cater for that type of child… let them pursue their interests and see where it leads.” /39

Another audience Q about SBC’s previously mentioned multiply disabled sister: “You said your sister "didn't have language." If she couldn't speak, I'm just curious how you know that? AAC was pretty much nonexistent when she would have been growing up... /40

...People still conflate speech (a motor function) and language (a cognitive function) despite clear anatomical differences between the two. The assumption that nonspeaking people are incapable of understanding and using language causes them to be denied access to robust AAC.” 41

SBC: “Questioner is absolutely right. I have to be careful how I talk about sister… She may well have understood more than a lot of people realized… We shouldn’t make assumptions that because someone doesn’t have expressive language that they may not understand quite a lot” /42

CG adds she + many editors at @thinkingautism have sons with high support needs and start with least dangerous assumption: their sons understand everything said to/about them. “Start with premise everyone communicates and thus everyone can self advocate...” /43

To end, SS plugs the upcoming movie The Reason I Jump @ReasonIJumpFilm, which shows the lives of non-speakers in a variety of cultures. lnk.bio/xnV3 /44

And that’s the end! Hope this helps those that couldn’t make it/don’t have the time to watch. Interested if people have thoughts on any of what I’ve shared. I’m sure CG will have something out for @thinkingautism and I’m looking forward to reading that! 45/45