Kim Wombles has done a long and interesting email interview with the controversial Professor Simon Baron-Cohen, a professor at Cambridge and a Director of the powerful and prestigious Autism Research Centre. This interview has been published at Science 2.0, which I'd never known about till now, and the interview has provoked many interesting comments.
I'm disappointed that Kim didn't question the professor about his disgraceful misrepresentation of people diagnosed with borderline personality disorder, but I'm glad that some people did raise this point in some interesting comments following the article. Kim did get to put lots of other good and important questions to Baron-Cohen, including this one:
"The online autism community is very vocal (and fairly well in agreement, considering the wide divides usually tearing it apart) that you are incorrect in your belief that autistic people lack empathy (and theory of mind). How do you respond to that charge and what evidence do you have that people with ASDs have zero empathy?"
The prof responded with that old chestnut about us lucky autistics who can read and write and use the internet not being representative of really, genuinely, fully autistic, disabled people. We are supposed to go away and be quiet and feel grateful for what we have and feel ashamed that we dare to call ourselves autistic, despite the fact that we score well within autistic territory in the scoring guides to the many questionnaires that the professor has created that supposedly identify autism. But wouldn't real, genuinely disabled autistics be too disabled to read and complete these autism diagnosis questionniares? Well, why did the prof create them, then? This is confusing!
Then the professor went on to explain how autistic kiddies fail some supposed tests of "theory of mind" that are used by academics in research studies, as though this has any direct relevance to the popular, non-academic, real life conceptions of what empathy means.
Then, the professor pulled out the Dunning-Kruger Effect as an explanation of why the autistic community has rejected the characterization of autistics as devoid of empathy, without explicitly mentioning the name of this effect. We are too dumb to know how dumb we are. This effect is a real phenomenon, but does it apply to autistics and empathy? Baron-Cohen asserts that people can be a poor judge of their own level of empathy; "When it comes to empathy, self-report is highly unreliable. For this reason, I would always advise that results from the questionnaires like the EQ (the self-report version) should be corroborated by other independent sources of evidence." Makes me wonder what the point of the EQ is then. I've been wondering about this for many years, as I've done this questionnaire quite a few times over, and my score varies wildly according to what is going on in my social life at the time. One has to question the academic credibility of any researcher who would offer up such an unreliable instrument for serious consideration by the world of science. Is the problem a lack of ability to estimate my own quotient of empathy, or is the problem really the idea that empathy is a thing that can be possessed and measured, like measuring a cup-full of sugar? I'm got a serious suspicion that the Dunning-Kruger Effect, or maybe some good old-fashioned self-delusion is in effect when the prof makes an estimation of his own powers of empathy.
Then, the professor contradicted his own categorization of autistics as "zero empathy" people and admitted that maybe some autistic people have some empathy, and maybe some autistic people have lots of affective/emotional empathy and maybe some autistics can systemize their way to having an above-average standard of morals. With all this back-pedalling I'm sure the professor's leg muscles must be aching still. Did you notice how the professor did not resort to citing research study findings in his many attempts to answer this most important question? It the kind of thing that I'd have expected a Cambridge professor to do.
This is an exercise in what I'd call giving the interviewee enough rope with which to hang himself. This type of public hanging is an ugly, prolonged, tortuous thing to witness, but also strangely compelling. It is worth a read, as are the most fascinating journal papers that K. Wombles has listed at the end of the interview. Many thanks, Kim!
An Interview With Simon Baron-Cohen On Zero-Empathy, Autism, And Accountability
By Kim Wombles
Science 2.0
June 4th 2011.
http://www.science20.com/countering_tackling_woo/interview_simon_baroncohen_zeroempathy_autism_and_accountability-79669
Thanks for the link...looks like some great reading is in my near future .
ReplyDeleteAs to empathy, I'm less interested in the obsurdly unscientific tests that claim that autistics have no theory of mind then the abundance of historical proofs that so many NT's appear to be pathologically sadistic for either personal greed, innate pleasure or to be "part of a group " . Has this guy ever cracked a history book or a newspaper .
There has been plenty of research and writing by psychologists on the subject of evil/antisocial behaviour in humans, done over a long period of time. This stuff just doesn't have the high public profile that the prof does.
ReplyDelete"We are too dumb to know how dumb we are."
ReplyDeleteHa ha! Good summation of his argument there; that *IS* pretty much what he says, isn't it?
(If it helps, I can tell you that the children's version of the EQ isn't self-reported ... the parents answer the questions about their children. Which to my mind is no less questionable, but it does remove some of the circularity that would otherwise be there ... "Your opinion of your own capacity for empathy is irrelevant because my instruments have shown me that you lack empathy, and my instruments are based on ... your opinion of your own capacity for empathy?? D'oh!")
The prof has been criticised by at least one other academic for relying on self-report, with good reason.
ReplyDeleteBaron-Cohen wrote: "So why might people with autism in the online community challenge this view? One possibility is that it is in the nature of empathy that people who are low in empathy are often the last people to be aware of it. This is because empathy goes hand-in-hand with self-awareness, or imagining how others see you, and it is in this very area that people with autism struggle."
ReplyDeleteI guess most autistics would claim very HIGH self-awareness but would define it as awareness of one's motives rather than awareness of identity within a group.
I think this is very significant.
"This is because empathy goes hand-in-hand with self-awareness, or imagining how others see you, and it is in this very area that people with autism struggle."
ReplyDeleteIs the professor suggesting that self-awareness is the same thing as imagining how others see one? If he is it's a bizarre belief. How others see a person can in some situations have little relation to the genuine qualities or characteristics of a person. A person who has lived a life being knowingly misunderstood by others might cease to care how others see them, or cease to respect the beliefs of others. Is this a lack of self-awareness?