Recommended by a friend who "suffers" the same baffling life experiences as I have, Neurotribes simultaneously educated me on the history of the term Recommended by a friend who "suffers" the same baffling life experiences as I have, Neurotribes simultaneously educated me on the history of the term Autism and the key players involved in defining and refining this diagnosis, as it opened my eyes to understanding my strengths/weaknesses/propensities.
My experience is, metaphorically, that I've been looking at a moire pattern on the wall for my entire life. It is comprised of recurring patterns experienced in social and intellectual situations. It baffles me. Why am I getting these results? Why is communication often so difficult?
As I sought explanations, I would hold up one filter after another through which I would view the pattern, and none made any real sense. Until the experiences of those on the ASD spectrum were described. Then, it was as if I had been given a magic decoder ring -- or, better, to avoid mixing metaphors, -- like I'd been looking at a 3-D movie all my life and someone finally put 3-D glasses on my face.
Knowing is the starting point for dealing with the symptoms and perhaps adjusting behavior to deal with them. At the same time, the book delves into the cruel irony that diagnosis and labeling almost inevitably results in stigma and/or calcified thinking. Claiming the label can open doors to treatment resources and understanding, but can also trigger blinkered pigeon-holing by people whose only exposure to Autism is Rain Man.
Once labeled, a person will be viewed by others through THEIR skewed moire patterns. Their treatment of the diagnosed person will be based on the stigma associated with a label that they think accurately defines a category that even the experts can't agree on to this day. The history of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM), mental illness inclusion and differentiation within it, and overlap of various "disorders," may come as a shock to those who have never learned how these labels are invented and applied. Sometimes, disorders are created by a doctor intent on cementing a legacy in the field. Much the same way academics sometimes invent jargon in order to publish "novel" research. Does it really illuminate, or is it only intentionally "new?" Are the players battling each other to create better understanding of the syndromes, or are they seeking fame, fortune and immortality?
My only complaint about the book -- and this can be taken as high praise, actually -- is that the author is so thorough in providing background on almost every major player in the history of the Autism/Asperger's/ASD diagnosis, that it felt at times like a compilation of science biographies.
This is a a great foundation; a worthwhile read for anyone interested in the history of Autism and/or mental illness, the nature of diagnoses, or the patterns of perception and skills identified by the pioneers studying "autistics" through the ages. ...more
To quote Tim Minchin's "White Wine in the Sun", "I don't believe that just because ideas are tenacious that it means that they're worthy." And thank gTo quote Tim Minchin's "White Wine in the Sun", "I don't believe that just because ideas are tenacious that it means that they're worthy." And thank goodness Billy Beane does not either; or Bill James; or Voros McCracken; or Galileo; or...
"Whoa... WHOA!!! Let's not get carried away, Hoss! Billy Beane in the same sentence with Galileo? This is a damn baseball book isn't it?" Ostensibly, yes... and if you've seen the movie, it's also a father/daughter love story starring Brad Pitt.
But what this book is, at its core, is a piercing look at an individual's ability and willingness to stand, armed with data, to fight against a dogmatic, institutional resistance to science. It is a case study of human nature and politics, played out in the microcosm of Baseball. This book is about "religion" and "tribalism" (even in the form of a national pastime) and the ways that all human organizations opposed to science protect themselves, their power and position. This book is about cognitive bias and an unwillingness to change even when evidence contrary to your beliefs is clearly and consistently demonstrated.**
In author Lewis' indictment of the generally stagnant pool of talent in baseball management I hear echoes of interfaith ecumenism: "There are no real standards, because no one wants to put too fine a point on the question: what qualifies these people for this job? Taking into account any quality other than "clubability" would make everyone’s membership a little less secure."
Yes, as long as we don't point a finger at each other, we can all get along just fine. You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours. The fraternal protection of status quo vs. one man's willingness to fight for what he sees as a better way.
Lewis' prose is smooth and pleasant reading. It helps to be a baseball fan, but contrary to some critiques I have heard, the narrative arc is not overwhelmed by statistics and "inside baseball." The diversions from the plot, to establish Bill James, Scott Hatteberg and Voros McCracken for the roles they play in the overall drama, are tightly drawn character studies that support later chapters.
=====
**How lucky could I be? What are the odds that I would finish Daniel Kahneman's "Thinking, Fast and Slow" and then dive immediately into a book that weaves a ripping tale about the very same cognitive biases (and resultant market inefficiencies) manifest in the world of Major League Baseball? I don't think I could ask for a better way to cement the lessons of Kahneman than the real-life story of "Moneyball."
As I read Kahneman's book I commented to myself that it could be a training manual for avoiding exploitation resulting from one's own cognitive biases, or it could be a recipe book for predators to use in ruthlessly taking advantage of them. Moneyball is about the latter group, looking at the horrendously inefficient, cognitively medieval way baseball was being run, and reaping the benefits of being willing and able to act on data rather than hunches.
Like baseball itself, 'Moneyball" is more than meets the eyes....more
In the last few years two books took me FOREVER to get through. The first was Daniel Dennett's "Darwin's Dangerous Idea" and the second is Kahneman's In the last few years two books took me FOREVER to get through. The first was Daniel Dennett's "Darwin's Dangerous Idea" and the second is Kahneman's "Thinking, Fast and Slow." What caused this? What do they have in common? Both books explain, in minute detail, simple concepts with immensely far-reaching implications, and both have been... after the slog... the most intellectually rewarding reading of my adult life.
Where to begin... I have a number of theories running around in my head, and occasionally I try to corral them on paper. I organize, sequence and interconnect them in a way that will prevent my reader from meaningfully widening their eyes, in an aside, while winding their finger around one ear... ("Cuckoo!") Good writing about complex topics is very, very difficult, and Kahneman has corraled 30+ years of science, his career and all he has learned into a perfectly arranged sequence that leads the reader into a wilderness... provisioning you in each chapter with the tools you'll need for the next part of the journey.
The second most striking effect on me is the number of times I said, "Yes... YES!!! this is what I've been saying!" In my case it has usually been some sort of "intuitive"(excuse me, Mr. Kahneman... I mean "System 1") recognition of a pattern in my observations about the way we think. In Kahneman's case those intuitions have been converted into theoretical propositions, each meticulously researched in well designed experiments. Clearly, this is at least one difference between me and a Nobel Prize winning researcher.
So why does this stuff matter? In the context of broader discussions of free will, intention, choice and control over the directions our lives take, this book can provide powerful insights that might currently be obscured by these "cognitive illusions" and the inherent limitations of "System 1/System 2" thinking.
Perhaps we're not as "free" in our decisions as we might like to think, if "priming" has such a stunningly reproducible effect. Perhaps we're not so determined, if activities that initially require "System 2" attention, can be turned into second-nature, "technical-expertise intuitions." I.e. learning and training MATTERS in our ability to detect and respond to events that... if untrained... might take advantage of our brain's inherent "blind spots" or weaknesses.
Perhaps childhood religious indoctrination is a very adept recognition of these mental tendencies/flaws, so profoundly (if intuitively/naively) expressed by Ignatius Loyola, founder of the Jesuit order, "Give me the boy until 7, I will give you the man." (paraphrased; forgive me)
Kahneman's discoveries and documentation of mental capacity and biases could form the basis of a "Mental Martial Arts" program: an alternative form of indoctrination, in which students are trained to understand their brains' weaknesses, and learn to take stances or engage in practices that eliminate or reduce the errors to which these weaknesses can lead.
This book will rearrange the way you think... about how you think....more
Loading...
