Calculemus!

Let us calculate.

when gender studies go mental

with one comment

Since the mid 1980s theory of mind account of autism (here‘s the landmark paper), this condition was thought to be the most informative when it came to the study of social cognition. Things have changed since then. In the early 1990s, Chris Frith’s book on schizophrenia proposed a model that put an impairment in mindreading at the roots of both autism and schizophrenia. The idea has been debated ever since, but the available evidence doesn’t seem clear enough to settle the issue. Other pathologies also made it to the social cognition scene, depression among them.

Sometime in the mid 1990s, Simon Baron-Cohen, one of the authors of the 1985 paper on autism linked above, began to think of autism as a result of a defect in the structure of the brain which consists in the hyper-development of specific male traits. This is the ‘extreme male brain’ theory of autism. Extreme male brains track and categorize stimuli into structures; they are natural organizers; and they don’t give a damn about the fact that some objects are special – i.e. people.

In the relevant context, ‘male’ and ‘female’ refer to features that are statistically characteristic, not necessarily to traits recognizable in individuals. Female autistics have extreme male brains too. Politically sensitive, the idea made it into a book only in 2004. (I began reading it a month or so ago, but my patience evaporated after the first two chapters. Next summer maybe.)

Now – and this is where I’ve been trying to get – something related to what Frith and Baron-Cohen have been doing made it to NY Times Science, in a not too well written, not very informative article. Here’s the core:

[…] autism and schizophrenia represent opposite ends of a spectrum that includes most, if not all, psychiatric and developmental brain disorders. The theory has no use for psychiatry’s many separate categories for disorders, and it would give genetic findings an entirely new dimension.

Since the main articles of this week’s NYT Science are dedicated to genetics, there is talk about genes in this case too. But one gets little or worse from pop science metaphors that have one thank one’s father for one’s autism and one’s mother for one’s schizophrenia. Better see the original papers.

Anunțuri

Written by George

Noiembrie 11, 2008 la 4:56 pm

Publicat în EN, Mind

Un răspuns

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. […] insomnia, and the range of books one can read recedes; but they get finished somehow. So with the previously here mentioned The Essential Difference by Simon Baron-Cohen. I thought I should add a few words, though my […]

    sidenotes « Calculemus!

    Ianuarie 27, 2009 at 8:25 pm


Lasă un răspuns

Completează mai jos detaliile tale sau dă clic pe un icon pentru a te autentifica:

Logo WordPress.com

Comentezi folosind contul tău WordPress.com. Dezautentificare / Schimbă )

Poză Twitter

Comentezi folosind contul tău Twitter. Dezautentificare / Schimbă )

Fotografie Facebook

Comentezi folosind contul tău Facebook. Dezautentificare / Schimbă )

Fotografie Google+

Comentezi folosind contul tău Google+. Dezautentificare / Schimbă )

Conectare la %s

%d blogeri au apreciat asta: