Skip to content


December 26, 2007

I would say that “Asperger’s” is merely a name for a category of neurological attributes. Scientists observe similar attributes in certain individuals and term it a “syndrome.” However, the syndrome is nothing more than a word, a social construction, not the attributes themselves. Treating the category or construction as a universal, as a real thing, is called essentialism (or “naive” ontological realism). Nominalists, like myself, reject essentialism as metaphysical speculation.

It assume that Asperger’s autism is not a “thing” which one adjusts to. Rather, it is a useful convention which explains certain categories of neurological diversity. Accepting the label is not the same as accepting it uncritically and without modification.

For instance, I have observed that some people relate to Asperger’s autism as an object and ask whether they “have it.” I relate to Asperger’s autism as a category, a social construction, which can be deconstructed.

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: