Ekstremalne randki extreme dating
Hi Estee, I wrote elsewhere that art and science should be mutually recursive (a computer geek term :-)).
Two functions are said to be mutually recursive when each makes a call into the other — in other words, when each is defined in part in terms of the other.
Ever notice that as autistic people (as adults) or as their caregivers, we cannot get away from answering questions about autism as if the individual is not there. This is not to say that we do not need research into both how we can assist autistic people with all of it, yet we should consider yielding to the idea that autism is fundamentally wrong.
We will always have a world in which there exists some type of disability.
At least, we all know that this is the very real possibility in terms of how that science will be used.
Regardless of edits, your letter was well-written and to the point without being antagonistic or off-putting.
The push to weed out anything “atypical” is very strong and it’s shocking that a test is even in the works that would provide such meaningless information to a (likely) uninformed parent-to-be. I do wish that more people would realize that not every autistic person is going to ‘contribute’ in visible ways. Although we know a lot more than we’ve ever known about the stuff and matter that makes us up, there is so much interconnectedness that we cannot put our thumbs upon.
As my family has experienced with our young son, life (and a good life at that) does go on after the diagnosis of ASD. I’ve got a non-verbal, highly aggressive son who brightens the life of anyone who comes in contact with him (at least so far, judging by the dedication of his workers and doctors). I’ve run across very few people in my life who don’t have ‘fouled up genes’ of one sort or another…whether it’s obesity, mental health issues, developmental disabilities, or just plain eccentricity, I wonder how many of us would be around if our parents and grandparents had access to prenatal tests for anything ‘wrong’. Is it possible at all that science can really distill this “essential nature? A SEED magazine article suggests that art and science (this now in my words) inform each other and art has to be taken seriously in the view of science. As science reduces us into a series of genes and molecules and neurons and so forth, art alludes to the ineffable nature/part of being human. “Sometimes the whole is best understood in terms of the whole,” states the SEED mag article: If art reflects the way we see the world, the way we construct science and the answers we seek is a reflection of how we view ourselves, as in this case autism.
Free online singles chat rooms and free Dating site where you can find single Women and Men looking to chat online for free no sign up , no registration or without registration..We offer multiple cam chat rooms using alternate technology, so users can also select the best chat room and the webcam format they like from numerous platforms.All you need is to have a desire to stop using drugs.In the case of art and science, the idea is much as you state above.(I haven’t read the SEED article yet.) I think it’s a misunderstanding of science to say that it is reductionist.