I would say the same thing, except that I would change “ADD” and “autism” to something not a disease or disorder - say, “the ability to smell cyanide” or “being a supertaster.”
Both can be tested (and I don’t see too many books about them anyway).
No, autism wasn’t “discovered” on the basis of a study. It was noticed, then studies were done.
What’s the “test” for being a supertaster or being able to smell cyanide? Subjective answers to questions asked of the testee, right?
Dr. Aron says she noticed a set of traits in people during a study for something else, and then began to put together a theory & study subjects based on that. I still don’t see why that’s unscientific, if you accept that it’s ok for autism.
The only objective and somewhat legitimate complaints you’ve made are (1) the test questions seem leading (I’ll grant that, but I addressed it above), and (2) it bothers you that Dr. Aron is selling her books for money. Eh, Einstein was paid when he won the Nobel Prize for his special theory of relativity.
I don’t care if I don’t convince you, but your arguments are not going to convince me, either. Call it a stalemate.
No. You give him vials of cyanide and something that looks like cyanide and asks him to smell them and tell you which is cyanide and which isn’t.
I’d like to see the study, as I’ve stated several times. For the third time: if it’s on the site, please point out where it is. I can’t find it. Not even a short briefing on the methods used. Nothing.
So what’s the point of the test? Oh, and they don’t “seem” leading. They are. Very much so.
Oh no. It bothers me that she pretends that she is doing this for any reason other than money, and it bothers me that people believe her. It bothers me that something she’s basically made up is being mentioned in Straight Dope threads as if it were established fact. It bothers me that people think something extremely obvious warrants attention.
Yeah, I bet that’s why he did it.
You’re wilfully admitting that you’re incapable of changing your mind? Wow. You don’t see that too often.
<nitpick>
Einstein was awarded the Nobel prize in 1922 for his paper, written in 1905, dealing with light being a particle.
</nitpick>
Your snotty attitude notwithstanding, I have had more than 3 mental health care professionals with PhD’s tell me that they agree with Dr. Aron and that they diagnose me with the trait. You are not qualified to diagnose me (if you are, show me your credentials and give me a free consultation). Those are 2 extremely valid reasons not to change my mind simply based on the stubborn opinions of an unknown poster on an internet message board. If I were to let you sway my opinion, based on the objective information we have here, I’d say that would be more worthy of being scorned.
So, you don’t wike me? Well, boo f-ing hoo.
Just show me the research. That’s all I’m asking. At least give me a short description of how it was done.
Nothing about hypersenitivity is inherently beneficial.
Ah, but that is where you are mistaken. Being extremely sensitive to emotions (and very often the thought processes that lead to those emotions) allows me to navigate relationships with other people with a deft touch. I am getting better at showing my own emotions more, but in a situation where I can see other people’s emotions and they can’t see mine, there is somewhat of an upper-hand to that dynamic. In situations where I am in a leadership role, it also allows me to be an effective and efficient leader, seeing who needs what and when for them to function best as a team member. Plus, I can read people’s faces at poker. 
Damn straight–being “high strung” or “overly sensitive” has allowed me to see what is coming and avoid/evade it–usually personal conflicts of some type or another. I can read the docs when they enter the nurses station–and know which ones to joke with and which one to just be straight business with on any given day. HSP helps me every day in my work–I “know” which patients are denying their pain and which ones are not pushing themselves.
Am I wrong sometimes? Of course–but not often and not completely. It’s a double edged sword–I dont’ WANT to read people’s mood all the time–that’s one reason I don’t socialize more. I can see that the woman in the corner, laughing with the guy is really uncomfortable with that guy and is trying to ease away from him. Or that the hostess really just wants us all to go home because it’s obvious to me that she and hubby have just had a major fight.
I am not telepathic; I don’t believe in that stuff for the most part. I don’t believe in UFO or aliens landing here etc–but I know I can pick up more "vibes"on people than most folks can.
What is it that you are looking for, Priceguy ? I agree with you that the quiz and the doctor are not scientific or research based. That doesn’t mean that HSP doesn’t exist, nor does it mean that such claims should be poo-pooed. Whose mind is open here?
Great. We agree.
Hey, I’ve just been asking for evidence. If it’s closedminded to want evidence of claims, then closedminded am I.
What claims are people making that you want evidence for, PriceGuy? (Note - NOT a sarcastic or snarky question - asked out of simple curiosity.)
Well, after answering the questions on that site, I have identified as an ‘independent self governor.’
Seriously, it is remarkably like the Nolan Quiz in that the phrasing of the question skews the answers toward the ‘condition’ being discussed. With this as a starting point, I am very skeptical of any other claims being made. Fruit of the poison tree, and all that.
I meet a lot of the criteria enumerated here, but, like Priceguy, I am not seeing anything out of the norm for the spectrum of human behavior. Some people are more sensitive than others. Yay. It doesn’t make you a freak, but it doesn’t make you special either. If you latch onto this as the answer you’ve always been seeking, then you have other issues than sensitivity.
Frankly, this strikes me as another way to bilk vulnerable people by offering them the answer to all of their problems.
And no, we should not approach this theory by giving it the benefit of the doubt until it’s debunked. Science doesn’t work that way. And anyone that tries to sell you on the existence of a condition while in the same breath trying to sell you the cure to same condition is a crank, a crook, or both.
Stonebow summed it up in one post better than I’ve been able to in a whole thread.