02-27-2006, 04:28 PM
02-27-2006, 07:08 PM
Would this be about Kim Peek? I've got a few things to say about him.
Nearly 1000 posts - I must be obsessive!
Nearly 1000 posts - I must be obsessive!
02-27-2006, 07:28 PM
I noticed they had the DVD of Rainman on special offer in Tesco today.
I had enough money to buy it if I'd wanted to. But I bought some bleach and other cleaning products instead.
So that's what I thought of Rainman.
I had enough money to buy it if I'd wanted to. But I bought some bleach and other cleaning products instead.
So that's what I thought of Rainman.
02-27-2006, 11:52 PM
They did an MRI scan and found that the part of the brain that connects the left lobe with the right lobe is missing.
And to compensate for that, his brain has made a whole lot of new connections but going across in unusual patterns. They said that this gave him unusual associations in his brain that helped him to memorise so much, through the associations.
And to compensate for that, his brain has made a whole lot of new connections but going across in unusual patterns. They said that this gave him unusual associations in his brain that helped him to memorise so much, through the associations.
03-01-2006, 12:33 AM
Kim Peek is not just autistic, but a mega-savant. Whether you liked the movie Rainman or not, he is a very interesting guy. I know alot of people were irritated by the movie because it doesn't really give a true portrayal of autism, it wasn't meant to. I am fascinated by him because I don't believe that only 1% of people on the spectrum have savant skills. I think most of us have an amazing capacity for memory and some decoding skills.
My own daughter is hyperlexic. She began to read and write around age 3 and blew her doc's away recognizing numbers in the hundreds. Anyway, the "real rainman" has little to do with the movie except being the inspiration for the character.
My own daughter is hyperlexic. She began to read and write around age 3 and blew her doc's away recognizing numbers in the hundreds. Anyway, the "real rainman" has little to do with the movie except being the inspiration for the character.
03-01-2006, 01:11 AM
Is his savant skill just his being able to memorize facts? How is that a mega savant? I don't really understand how that is a mega savant compared with Mozart or Einstein, as they actually produced something.
03-01-2006, 01:19 AM
I remember the term used to be called "idiot savant" - which makes it clear that there must be islands of outstanding ability rising from a background of general "idiocy." (whatever that may mean!)
03-01-2006, 01:41 AM
Stella Wrote:
I remember the term used to be called "idiot savant" - which makes it clear that there must be islands of outstanding ability rising from a background of general "idiocy." (whatever that may mean!)
Oh, they mean 'he's a regular, if exagerated, person' then. You know, the whole 'having strengths and weaknesses' thing.
03-01-2006, 05:34 AM
Amy Wrote:
They did an MRI scan and found that the part of the brain that connects the left lobe with the right lobe is missing.
And to compensate for that, his brain has made a whole lot of new connections but going across in unusual patterns. They said that this gave him unusual associations in his brain that helped him to memorise so much, through the associations.
And to compensate for that, his brain has made a whole lot of new connections but going across in unusual patterns. They said that this gave him unusual associations in his brain that helped him to memorise so much, through the associations.
It would interesting if this turns out to have future applications in AI (it is most likely beyond current technology though).
03-01-2006, 08:53 AM
This programme belongs to the new generation of Freak Show.
Like many of its kind, the film makers used specially staged medical enquiries to give a veneer of legitimacy to the performance.
Strange music and animations were used throughout to suggest Peek lived in a bizarre alternative state of consciousness.
The film makers "followed" Peek and his father on a journey from one institution to another, when in fact they had arranged the entire journey to suit the needs of television audiences for 'a story.'
By claiming over and over that Peek was totally unique, the only one in the world etc etc , the programme directly attacked the values of autistic culture, and the moral imperative for society to provide a better deal for AS people.
Like many of its kind, the film makers used specially staged medical enquiries to give a veneer of legitimacy to the performance.
Strange music and animations were used throughout to suggest Peek lived in a bizarre alternative state of consciousness.
The film makers "followed" Peek and his father on a journey from one institution to another, when in fact they had arranged the entire journey to suit the needs of television audiences for 'a story.'
By claiming over and over that Peek was totally unique, the only one in the world etc etc , the programme directly attacked the values of autistic culture, and the moral imperative for society to provide a better deal for AS people.
03-01-2006, 12:38 PM
I think they copied the techinique of seeing things through his eyes from the film 'A beautiful mind'. Quite a few shows have done it since.
03-02-2006, 06:58 PM
Did they even mention that he is autistic? Did they mention autism at all apart from indirectly (saying he had similarities to other people who lacked a TOM) ?
03-03-2006, 06:48 PM
According to some "experts" who have studied Peek for quite some time, he is not autistic. I'm sure you'all will be delighted when I explain their reasoning for this surprising claim.
A while ago I read this article about Kim Peek from the December 2005 edition of Scientific American magazine:
http://www.sciamdigital.com/index.cfm?fa...99ADB8F9E2
I have been meaning to make comment about the article for quite some time but have been too busy.
It's a very interesting article, explaining that Peek does not have any corpus callosum, the bit of the brain that connects the right and left hemispheres. I recall once reading a post by an aspie member of this forum in which they divulged that they have a very unusual corpus callosum, so I personally think having an odd corpus callosum could be an autistic characteristic, especially in light of the knowledge that the sexes have differences in this part of the brain, and my own personal favourite "what causes autism" theory involves the sex hormone testosterone. But the scientistis who are supposed to know all about Mr Peek would surely disagree, because they reckon Peek is not autistic.
The article lists many unusual characteristics of Mr Peek; he walks with an unusual gait, cannot do chores or button his clothes, and is no good with abstraction. To me this all sounds a lot like the kind of disabilities that some auties and aspies have, due to dyspraxia and cognitive/sensory difficulties associated with autism, but the scientistis who are supposed to know all about Mr Peek would surely disagree, because they reckon Peek is not autistic.
Peek has a large head, as do many autistics (scientists have proven an association between head size and autism), and he also has an underdeveloped cerebellum, which is also thought to be found in autism, but some experts would say that does not indicate that Peek is autistic, they are just coincidences.
Peek also is said to have "abnormalities" in the left hemishpere of his brain, and the article goes on to explain the possible significance of this in light of the male brain/testosterone theory of cerebral development. The article even mentions autism associated with this effect, and I certainly believe Peek's left hemishpere is like that of an autistic person, as I have a number of neurological quirks myself, and they all seem to involve odd functioning of parts of the left hemisphere, but the scientistis who are supposed to know all about Mr Peek would surely disagree, because they reckon Peek is not autistic.
"Sometimes his answers to questions or directions are quite concrete and literal." according to the article. If you think this sounds like a simple, clear example of autistic literal-mindedness, some scientists would disagree, because they reckon Peek is not autistic.
The article explains how Peek was "reclusive, retreating to his room when company came" before he gained self-confidence from fame and positive contacts with people outside of his family. But if you think that reclusiveness sounds like the way many autistic people live, I'm sure some experts would disagree, as they reckon Peek is not autistic. From what I have learned about aspies and auties, many never gain much self-confidence or get much positive encouragement from people, so I have got to admit that could be a difference between Peek and your average autistic. :wink:
A Mozart scholar is mentioned in the article. She thinks Peek is like Mozart in that both men had/have "an enlarged head, a fascination with numbers and uneven social skills." I think that comparison is interesting, as an AS expert (Prof. Michael Fitzgerald) has written an argument in a book that Mozart was an aspie, and of course, big heads, fascination with numbers and poor social skills are classic autistic traits. So does that mean Peek could also be an autistic? You know what some experts would say ...
So if Peek isn't autistic, what unusual, autistic-appearing type of person is he then? The article says that Peek's diagnosis is ""developmental disorder not otherwise specified" with no diagnosis of autistic disorder." The article describes Peek as a savant not an autistic.
The article says that only half of all savants are autistic, and one thing that is necessary for the development of savant skills is "a strong interest in the subject matter in question." Gee, I think that "strong interest" in a subject sounds just like the classically autistic obsession with a specialized subject or special interest, but I'm sure some experts would disagree, arguing that this isn't autism, its just savantism.
So why are these experts so sure Peek isn't autistic? "In contrast with most autistic people, Kim is outgoing and quite personable." I guess the logic they employed was that "all autistics are dislikeable and unfriendly, Peek is not dislikeable and unfriendly, therefore we can rule out an autism diagnosis for Peek". There is a rather large pile of large and small clues linking Peek with autism, but I guess those scientists must be disabled when it comes to noticing a pattern in lots and lots of little details, as they are not autistic.
The "experts" who wrote this article are Darold Treffert and Daniel D. Christensen. A reference to the site www. savantsyndrome.com was given at the end of the article.
When I read this article I was surprised that some experts were claiming that Peek is not autistic, as I was sure Peek was one of the unfortunate victims featured in a documentary about autism that I viewed on TV a number of years ago. In the doco the filmmakers travelled all around the US meeting a number of autism "experts" and autistics. I am sure Peek was shown doing a very slow job of cleaning his teeth one by one with his toothbrush, while a female Australian autism "expert" explained the man's slow work as "executive dysfunction". The look on her face and tone of voice (which the autistic subject could have been unable to decode) suggested to me that she thought this guy was a hopeless case. Knowing what I know about autism/AS, I could think of many different possible explanations for this man's eccentric tooth-brushing method besides "executive dysfunction".
A while ago I read this article about Kim Peek from the December 2005 edition of Scientific American magazine:
http://www.sciamdigital.com/index.cfm?fa...99ADB8F9E2
I have been meaning to make comment about the article for quite some time but have been too busy.
It's a very interesting article, explaining that Peek does not have any corpus callosum, the bit of the brain that connects the right and left hemispheres. I recall once reading a post by an aspie member of this forum in which they divulged that they have a very unusual corpus callosum, so I personally think having an odd corpus callosum could be an autistic characteristic, especially in light of the knowledge that the sexes have differences in this part of the brain, and my own personal favourite "what causes autism" theory involves the sex hormone testosterone. But the scientistis who are supposed to know all about Mr Peek would surely disagree, because they reckon Peek is not autistic.
The article lists many unusual characteristics of Mr Peek; he walks with an unusual gait, cannot do chores or button his clothes, and is no good with abstraction. To me this all sounds a lot like the kind of disabilities that some auties and aspies have, due to dyspraxia and cognitive/sensory difficulties associated with autism, but the scientistis who are supposed to know all about Mr Peek would surely disagree, because they reckon Peek is not autistic.
Peek has a large head, as do many autistics (scientists have proven an association between head size and autism), and he also has an underdeveloped cerebellum, which is also thought to be found in autism, but some experts would say that does not indicate that Peek is autistic, they are just coincidences.
Peek also is said to have "abnormalities" in the left hemishpere of his brain, and the article goes on to explain the possible significance of this in light of the male brain/testosterone theory of cerebral development. The article even mentions autism associated with this effect, and I certainly believe Peek's left hemishpere is like that of an autistic person, as I have a number of neurological quirks myself, and they all seem to involve odd functioning of parts of the left hemisphere, but the scientistis who are supposed to know all about Mr Peek would surely disagree, because they reckon Peek is not autistic.
"Sometimes his answers to questions or directions are quite concrete and literal." according to the article. If you think this sounds like a simple, clear example of autistic literal-mindedness, some scientists would disagree, because they reckon Peek is not autistic.
The article explains how Peek was "reclusive, retreating to his room when company came" before he gained self-confidence from fame and positive contacts with people outside of his family. But if you think that reclusiveness sounds like the way many autistic people live, I'm sure some experts would disagree, as they reckon Peek is not autistic. From what I have learned about aspies and auties, many never gain much self-confidence or get much positive encouragement from people, so I have got to admit that could be a difference between Peek and your average autistic. :wink:
A Mozart scholar is mentioned in the article. She thinks Peek is like Mozart in that both men had/have "an enlarged head, a fascination with numbers and uneven social skills." I think that comparison is interesting, as an AS expert (Prof. Michael Fitzgerald) has written an argument in a book that Mozart was an aspie, and of course, big heads, fascination with numbers and poor social skills are classic autistic traits. So does that mean Peek could also be an autistic? You know what some experts would say ...
So if Peek isn't autistic, what unusual, autistic-appearing type of person is he then? The article says that Peek's diagnosis is ""developmental disorder not otherwise specified" with no diagnosis of autistic disorder." The article describes Peek as a savant not an autistic.
The article says that only half of all savants are autistic, and one thing that is necessary for the development of savant skills is "a strong interest in the subject matter in question." Gee, I think that "strong interest" in a subject sounds just like the classically autistic obsession with a specialized subject or special interest, but I'm sure some experts would disagree, arguing that this isn't autism, its just savantism.
So why are these experts so sure Peek isn't autistic? "In contrast with most autistic people, Kim is outgoing and quite personable." I guess the logic they employed was that "all autistics are dislikeable and unfriendly, Peek is not dislikeable and unfriendly, therefore we can rule out an autism diagnosis for Peek". There is a rather large pile of large and small clues linking Peek with autism, but I guess those scientists must be disabled when it comes to noticing a pattern in lots and lots of little details, as they are not autistic.
The "experts" who wrote this article are Darold Treffert and Daniel D. Christensen. A reference to the site www. savantsyndrome.com was given at the end of the article.
When I read this article I was surprised that some experts were claiming that Peek is not autistic, as I was sure Peek was one of the unfortunate victims featured in a documentary about autism that I viewed on TV a number of years ago. In the doco the filmmakers travelled all around the US meeting a number of autism "experts" and autistics. I am sure Peek was shown doing a very slow job of cleaning his teeth one by one with his toothbrush, while a female Australian autism "expert" explained the man's slow work as "executive dysfunction". The look on her face and tone of voice (which the autistic subject could have been unable to decode) suggested to me that she thought this guy was a hopeless case. Knowing what I know about autism/AS, I could think of many different possible explanations for this man's eccentric tooth-brushing method besides "executive dysfunction".
03-03-2006, 07:14 PM
Very strange. "The article says that Peek's diagnosis is ""developmental disorder not otherwise specified" That makes PDD-NOS which is considered to be on the spectrum, so they could say 'he's not autistic' but he is still on the spectrum. They sound like they are saying its got four legs, grey skin, short tail, long trunk, but it's not an elephant! :roll: :razz:
03-03-2006, 07:28 PM
The exact words were "developmental disorder not otherwise specified" so I guess that is different to "Pervasive developmental disorder - not otherwise specified". I have a copy of the DSM - IV, and I can't find any "developmental disorder not otherwise specified" in it, but it does list a catch all category of ""Learning Disorder NOS", which doesn't seem to be very applicable to Peek anyway. I found no mention of the word "savant" in the index at all. If you have enough letters after your name you are allowed to make up your own diagnostic categories.
Pages: 1 2