Certainly if you consider, what, 30 years ago they would have been one and the same… the latest I’ve heard of is discalculia, essentially math dyslexia. Are we now classifying different types of stupidity?
No. Dyslexia is an input/output problem, not an intelligence problem. One can be a genius and be dyslexic. Something similar goes for this “discalculia” most likely; if it’s just a mathematical disability, one could be quite clever in areas besides math.
Look at it this way: Suppose, when you looked at a word, or a multi-digit number, the letters or numbers seemed to jump around and transpose themselves between your eyes and your brain. Suddenly, what was 1437 is 1437, or was it 1473? Same thing with words. Was that sequence of letters w-o-r-d, or w-r-o-d? So you stop and look at it again. But you’re still not sure. Darn it, they won’t seem to stay in the same order. Finally you think you’ve got it. Then you go on to the next sequence. Lather, rinse, repeat.
It’s going to take a long time to decipher what that sentence, or set of numbers, really is. You’re going to make a lot of mistakes, and your spelling will be atrocious. After a while it just becomes more and more difficult, as people keep expecting you to master more and more complex combinations. And then they start insisting that you’re just stupid, or goofing off, or you just need to be smacked around a little so you’ll pay attention. You’re so frustrated you can hardly stand it, and after a while you figure they must be right – you’re just a stupid, worthless person who can’t seem to do anything correctly.
And yet, when you hear an idea spoken, you understand perfectly well what people are talking about. You can think about things, and you understand how other things work, not just those annoying marks on a page.
Do you really think all of that is just categorizing types of mental deficiency?
I have no idea where you were 30 years ago, but 35 years ago I was aware that dyslexia had been identified as a medical condition totally separate from intelligence at least 75 years prior to that.
Where did you get the idea that dyslexia was confused with lower intelligence?
The main stupidity of dyslexia is that we used to think dyslexics were merely stupid.
I am certainly no expert on this, but I have read that it is potentially a problem with the Cerebellum, not the Cerebrum. The cerebellum controls post-processing of stimulus response, coordinated motor control and often acts as a buffer between voluntary cerebral commands/perceptions and the body. Let’s see, here’s one source [http://www.dfes.gov.uk/readwriteplus/understandingdyslexia/resources/theorytables/biological/cerebellarimpairment/ ].
Thus, “intelligence” is usually defined as a cerebral function – voluntary calculations, fundamental processing of information, creativity, etc… Thus, one with Cerebellar problems only (eg causing dyslexia), might indeed be great thinkers otherwise. The only problem is the involuntary post-processing of input/output signals.
If one were to alter or refine the word “intelligence” to include conscious ADAPTABILITY, then it gets a little greyer. I’ve heard of some people being born with dyslexia and finding ways to work around it later (as with milder autism), thus it is nearly unnoticable to outside observers. There is some disagreement between biographers and popular writers on whether Albert Einstein was lightly dyslexic or not - if he was, then he was certainly one of those cases where he was able to work around it.
Far be it from me to get deeply involved with such a well thought out and thoroughly researched OP, but:
[
](http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_g2602/is_0002/ai_2602000210)
[
](http://www.dyslexiaindiana.org/faqs.asp)
[
](http://www.pbs.org/parents/readinglanguage/articles/dyslexia/print.html)
Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
Is this why I’ve never been able to remember what 8×7 is? I always have to mentally subtract 8 from 64.
8x7 is one of the hardest basic multiplication facts to memorize: it’s not a double, it’s not a five or ten or one, it’s not a square, it’s not one of the convenient 9s.
Fives, tens, ones, and nines all follow patterns that are easy to memorize and extrapolate from. Doubles and squares are reinforced through other memorization (doubles through memorizing your addition facts, squares through memorizing squares).
So you’re not alone in having trouble with this one.
As for the OP: let’s stipulate that you’re right, that we’re classifying stupidity now. What’s wrong with that? I’m assuming that stupidity is undesirable. Classifying stupidity would presumably be a first step toward figuring out how to rectify it.
If discalculia is a type of stupidity, then teachers are on their way to eliminating it, something that would be much harder to do were it not recognized and appreciated as a specific learning disorder. For class this past semester, I wrote up a unit plan for teaching double-digit multiplication, and I posited a girl with discalculia in my class (although I didn’t know the term–thanks!) I wrote into each lesson plan modifications for her, so that she could find ways to work through the condition.
Call it stupidity if it makes you feel better, but classifying it seems a useful thing to do.
Daniel
Let’s see, the list of [famous people thought to have been or to be dyslexic](http://www.dyslexiamentor.com/famous dyslexics.php) includes Thomas Edison, Alexander Graham Bell, Agatha Christie, Charles Schwab, Andy Warhol, John Lennon, Leonardo Da Vinci, and others. So it seems that one can be dyslexic and quite intelligent in other ways. Then again Tom Criuse is on that list too, so you can also be quite dumb. 
Seriously, by definition you cannot be too “stupid” and be labelled as dyslexic. It, like dyscalculia, is a learning disability and is defined by having significant discrepency (15 or 20 points depending on the definition) between one learning channel and your overall IQ. Dyslexia is defined as a difficulty in learning to read, write, and spell despite having overall normal intelligence and opportunity. Can it cause overall school difficulty and poor grades and unidentified will many of these people grow up being called (and believe themselves to be) stupid? Of course. But while they may actually just be average, they may actually also be quite bright.
In my personal experience as a pediatrician I find that the greatest difficulty is actually had by the very bright child with dyslexia. This is because they are bright enough to cover it up for several years. Despite a near total lack of being able to sound out words, they can use memorizing the shapes of whole words and clues from the pictures on the page, to give teachers and parents a false impression of adequate reading skills up until around fourth or fifth grade, when the number of words increases beyond their ability to memorize that many whole word shapes and the pictures disappear. Then they start to fail and fail badly, but by then the best chance to remediate has been lost.
Reading is obviously a key skill for sucess in many other subjects. Without remediation, or for some, “go around” strategies, it is hard to succeed in science or social studies, for example. Dyscalculia has fewer pervasive general academic effects and is therefore identified much less commonly even though it likely occurs as commonly as dyslexia. A lot just say they are bad at math and leave it at that. They use calculators and successfully avoid math in the future.
What is the reason for your specific interest in these learning disabilities, btw?
“Medicine has made a lot of progress. What used to be called an itch is now called an allergy”
Unknown
Seconded.
“30 years ago”, in case anyone is feeling mildly discalculic, means 1975. We’ve made a lot of advances since then, but it was not the Dark Ages (except for our fashion/hairstyle choices, perhaps) .
My little sister-- very smart and very very dyslexic-- fooled my parents and her teachers in just this manner. Her IQ, when tested at an age before she was expected to read, was (I think) 135. Years later, with a writen test, it barely scraped a hundred.
It’s odd to be out to dinner with someone, in the middle of an insightfull conversation about history or politics, and have to stop because she needs help with the menu. I swear people who think dyslexia=stupidity just don’t know any dyslexics.
I know it’s a tangent and anecdotal, but 8x7 is one of my “favorite’s” and always easy for me. No clue why but the number 56 seemed to stand-out compared to the others.
As for the OP, I think the problem was not knowing that someone was dyslexic created the impression they were stupid, especially with kids in school (like my ex-wife), but once identified, then they could work around it.
Dyslexics of the world…untie!
[sub]Sorry. Had to do it. I love that bumper sticker.[/sub]
That is allways the nasty one. Maybe remember 56 is 7 times 8, which of course is 5,6,7,8 in order.
In the OP’s favour dyslexia wasn’t properly understood in UK schools 40 years ago, and was only just becoming recognised when I was in school 30 years ago. Before that someone would have been considered lazy if they were a bad speller. Probably not stupid, as their skills in maths and other things would show that not to be the case.
Let’s classify some more
dysgynea: Difficulty socializing with/talking to women (usual sufferers: geeky guys)
dysandria: Difficulty socializing with/talking to men (usual sufferers: geeky girls)
dysmusica: Difficulty learning to play a musical instrument
dyspaintia: Difficulty painting/drawing
dysdancia: Difficulty dancing without causing others to laugh
We all know that knowing how to paint, how to play an instrument and how to socialize with the opposity sex requires some type of intelligence, and so people that are not able to do these things well must be suffering from some form of disability, since they are otherwise smart people.
Is your point to ridicule such classifications? if so, what’s the point of your ridicule? As I stated earlier, the classification of such conditions seems to be helping folks fix them. In what way is this a bad thing?
Daniel
If there was research done which showed neurological differences, like those present in dyslexics, then sure.
What other differences exist between human brains than neurological differences?
Aren’t all our abilities due to the specific way each of our brains is wired up?
So, some peoples’ brains are wired up to be good at some things and other peoples’ brains are wired up to be good at other things. What’s new?