Students Vs Experts of Autism by Brian Henson and Sharisa Joy Kochmeister

Yes, that's why we are carrying on this conversation- -to
show others (especially NTs) that you do not have to
disagree with someone to have a conversation with them.
Agreeing with another person does not mean an end to the
conversation or discussion, ...just a catalyst to further
social interaction, as humans lean towards, at times (but
sometimes prefer to be by themselves at other times).

Another agreement is that anyone is not a student unless
they show a true willingness to study and learn, and we
are very, very fortunate in that we have such a student
right on this list...non other than Tom, himself.

The others, who are there but do not have a willingness to
study and learn are just like "pupils" in elementary school,
there because they are required to be (with no homeschooling) ,
but are often unwilling to learn or study, therefore, they
are not students.

Perhaps, some day, there will be an autistic university,
where students, like Tom, can come and the staff, instructors,
and management of this university will all be autistic
individuals. We could even have Einstein there (as an
instructor) if he was still alive (along with Bill Gates
as dean of the department of economics, and Temple Grandin
as professor of animal husbandry, along with Wendy Lawson,
Donna Williams, Diane Holiday-Willey, Amanda Baggs, and so
many others too numerous to list in this one message). You,
Sharisa, could be the president of this university.. .;-)

What's wrong with a professor providing his students with
lectures via Facilitated Communication? Nothing, as I see it.
In fact, that would make the course "sink in" far more than
a standard lecture, and the students would come away with a
far better understanding of communication, as well.

--- In autismlist@yahoogro ups.com, "Sharisa Joy Kochmeister"
wrote:
>
> In other words, Brian, we agree, so why carry on this conversation.
> Putting experts in quotes implies that they aren't anything of the
> sort - in fact, they're not even students unless they show a true
> willingness to study & learn.
>

Autism Diva Goes Conferencing

Wednesday, December 14, 2005
Dr. Eric Fombonne at the MIND


Dr. Fombonne debunked the autism epidemic myth, and MMR and thimerosal autism causation myths at the UCD MIND institute this evening.

What a guy. (sigh)

This photo was taken after his first presentation (during the intermission, before his second presentation). The woman came to listen to the presentation, the man on the right apparently works for the MIND institute, he introduced Dr. Fombonne's presentations, but Autism Diva doesn't recognize him, and missed the parts where he introduced himself.

Dr. Fombonne's presentations should be available online in streaming video format in a month or two on the MIND institute's website.

If they don't decide to clip the question session from the video of his second presentation, you may get to hear Autism Diva. There was a mercury dad there who decided to do an advertisement for an upcoming conference in Sacramento featuring David Kirby and Dr. Kartzinel and some of what appears to be anti-vax agitprop. After the dad's promoting of the upcoming conference and mentioning that he had distributed fliers with information about the "biomedical" conference right there in the MIND's conference room ... he started to preach thimerosal mythology in a quite rude and righteous-indignation-filled manner ... typical.

After Fombonne nicely answered his points and told the dad he was wrong, Autism Diva took her turn for asking a "question from the audience" and added some more reasons why mercury dad was wrong. Then another parent asked a question and Autism Diva packed her cool red backpack with laptop compartment (in a huff) and walked out (in a huff) in her red, silk brocade Converse high-tops (in a huff).



Autism Diva took this photo to make sure that the camera's flash feature was off so she could get pictures of Fombonne speaking without disrupting the presentation ... but those sure are some pretty shoes. :-)

Thanks, Dr. Fombonne. Thanks MIND institute for hosting him (even though you are part of the problem).

More Musings by Crabtail

here i will post current headlines of autistics that have fc'd and are now independant. do we negate their material when they still needed assistance?

i've read some comments here on this board. and i will begin by stating that i am an autistic. and i was invisible untill i could master speech, and untill then i was considered mentally retarded this was until age 12. i was treated like a non person. people talked over me like i wasn't there. and i watched like from a distance, like from another place, there but never there. i was always aware, i listened to what people said and also listened to what they could not hear because they were too busy talking they became like deaf. and i saw what others couldn't notice, because they were too busy seeing only what they wanted to see. i remembered what peoples chose to forget. all these i took in like a sponge absorbing all. all things said and unsaid. i watched i listened, i waited. i took all things in... all of it. not some of it, not just what i wanted. until i felt to explode. it was/is quite a journey...perhaps someday you will experience as well when egos and mind you cast behind and aside and merely just BE. no mind.. no thought. nothing and yet everything.

i do fc with my child, i know her troubles, she needn't come join me here, too crammed and small here. with fc she surfaces, connecting here. the vocabulary of her thoughts interpreting into words. i merely hold her elbow. i am but a bridge and she can visit but doesn't need to stay... it's more like leaving one prison and entering another. i say to her. the natives here don't know what they are doing anyway... they don't know how they sound. they don't know how they look. dignity, respect, compassion, can just be words they toss around but not really mean anything. they only see what they want to see. only hear what they want to hear. we have our prisons, and the natives they have theirs.

but then i'm just an autistic, so who cares what i think. what does it matter what i see? or hear? or witness? i'm nobody really, termed mentally retarded until almost adulthood. cast away and tossed aside, living on the fringes of society. a mental cripple, a handicap. hidden away. silent all these years. till i hear something different. something strange... and it's my voice. i crossed the bridge and entered your world...and now with voice can i use it for any great thing? what if it be lost to me again? and if so i use mine voice can i really change anything? does it matter anyway? and now that i'm here so tight and strange, everything condensed. my memory goes, like a dream fading. and i wonder will i? like the natives here will i? forget to listen? will i also turn deaf? in time, while walking the walk, talking the talk, will i? will i also forget to see? and walk blind seeing only with the eyes in my head and the eyes of ego? will i, if a walk amongst you long enough?

i am no longer off distance watching and observing i
hirsh | 11.27.05 - 9:25 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

here be the links:

http://www.stateart.com/ pressrel...mNomination.asp

http://hometown.aol.com/sharisajoy/

http://soeweb.syr.edu/thefci/aut.../ authorship.htm

http://www.jhu.edu/netverse/ poet...ochmeister.html

http://www.onqhr.com.au/ONQHR/GR...SE- NR021211.HTM

http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/...e/ notebook.html

http:// magma.nationalgeographic....line_extra.html

http://www.stateart.com/ pressrel...mNomination.asp

http://www.pbs.org/kcet/closerto...re/ show_03.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/ 2...ain536416.shtml
hirsh | 11.27.05 - 9:27 am | #

Hirhurim - Musings

Hirhurim - Musings

Rabbi's Discuss Facilitated Communication for Autistics:



Rav Elya did indeed support it. I don't think that his supporters talk about that much now...
Bert | 11.21.05 - 11:03 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

from what i recall, the gedolim were passive-supportive, meaning, its nice, but dont rely on anythign they say. one line that summed it up for me (i think) was - take the mussar, but not much else as we can not verify that they are prophets or anything like that
Anonymous | 11.21.05 - 11:24 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

whaddya mean, Rav Elya wrote a haskomoh for the FC book. Strange that he thought FC had good kiruv value, but condemned R' Slifkin and said that we should only be teaching the emmes of Torah!
Bert | 11.21.05 - 11:38 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gil, you're starting to sound like a skeptic. Better stop thinking quickly.
DNA | 11.21.05 - 11:50 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Gedolim don't believe in retracting things, as it would be motzi la'az on their authority. A notable exception to this was Rav Yaakov Kamenetzky, who publicly admitted that he was mistaken in his earlier lack of support for chinnuch atzma'i. Unfortunately it's rare to find an Ish Emes like him.
Moish | 11.21.05 - 11:51 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rabbi Weintraub in his evil ignorance did indeed support it and caused great harm to some of the most vulnerable families in our community. When the "book" to which he gave his stupid haskomoh came out I knew that it would result in these desparate families spending money and time on this fraudulent treatment (as has since happened). I wanted to write a critical review, citing the evidence of the worthlessness of the procedure, for a prominent Orthodox publication but the editor refused since the book had Rabbi Weintraub's haskomoh. He agreed with me that Rabbi W was undoubtedly an ignoramus on the scientific issues but said that his board would not permit my discussing the issues publicly. He suggested I appeal to them to allow some statement but I was not willing to write unless I could produce an honest critique. Rabbi Weintraub has clearly not become less evil with advancing age.
Melech Press | 11.21.05 - 11:54 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By the way, Mishpachah magazine, which is very revolutionary by charedi standards, printed an article exposing the fallacy of FC.
Bert | 11.21.05 - 11:54 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> The Gedolim don't believe in retracting things, as it would be motzi la'az on their authority.

It is, I suppose, evident that they "don't believe in retracting things" but what's the source for this reason that you give?
S. | Homepage | 11.21.05 - 12:11 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You find that sort of reasoning in various Rishonim etc., probably even in the Gemara, I forget now. Search on the Bar-Ilan CD. THe problem is that when it is taken too far, it undermines credibility even more.
Moish | 11.21.05 - 12:19 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Interesting letter about FC at http://www.campsci.com/scams/ (which, by the way, has a lot of really great stuff)
Anon | 11.21.05 - 12:22 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The *very* sporadic "Jewish Studies" journal put out by Dvar Yerushalayim had published in an issue from 2000 a big article on it, very supportive, offered it as 'proof' of transcendental processes.
npaulovic | 11.21.05 - 12:35 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Whoa, strong stuff, Dr. Press. But some things have to said, I guess.

Two thoughts:

-I wasn't aware that cerebal palsy means mental retardation. Am I wrong?

-I was pretty troubled by the unchallenged idea that autistic children "intercede" for us.
Nachum Lamm | 11.21.05 - 12:53 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Whew!Why are only the gedolim who gave FC tepid support bashed here and all those professinals who made money off it ignored?In general I don't understand why mecanchim and selfless gedolim are always acussed of everything and the big mouth theripasts who clearly have an ulterior (monetary,kovod etc.)motives left alone and allowed to meddle into our lives as much as they want.See mispocha magizine (whice at first was an ardent supporter of FC)almost every week they have a new way to enrichen CSWs and I never saw anyone express skeptisism towards them.Why don't the same people who make fun of the agudah convention make fun of the nefesh confrence/convention for a change?
not sure | 11.21.05 - 12:59 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are sources that a Beit Din shouldn't always retract a ruling. But the an individual Rov is supposed to publicly retract mistaken statements. The Talmud is full of such stories.
Isaacal | 11.21.05 - 1:01 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

but Weintraub thinks he knows enough about science to say that Slifkin is wrong. and we're supposed to take him seriously?
anon | Homepage | 11.21.05 - 1:14 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll try to avoid lashon hora, and just state the general facts without any names. You be the judge:

Any so-called gadol who openely signs on to anti-scientific stupidity is not a gadol, but a fool, despite whatever Torah knowledge he posseses. Anyone who calls such a person a gadol joins the camp of the fools and the haters of Truth.

There are many TRUE gedolim out there. We know who they are. Unfortunately, many of the unschooled among us have elevated fools to the gadol title. For those of us that cherish the Torah and the Truth, it behooves us to expose the gross falsehoods that corrupt the Jewish people and the holy Torah, and besmirch, by assocation, the reputations of the true gedolim.

I don't know the best way to do this without forbidden LH, but Rabbi Student has made an excellent start. Thank you...
GadolAnon | 11.21.05 - 2:01 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's good to hear from MP again! Hope all goes well...

FC is certain idiocy, and there's a bit of a 'credo quia absurdum' attitude by the UO supporters. One the fatal flaws in FC's claims lies in the fact that many of it's subjects have severe autism. Those on the milder end of the autism spectrum, while communicative, tend to use language idiosyncratically. Such idiosyncracies don't show up in FC. That indicates that it's not the patient who is doing the talking. The equivalent would be an illiterate who (magically) writes a perfect French but doesn't understand a word of it.

All this is admitted by the FC charlattan in the frum community. Whereas honest people would recognize it as proof against FC, FC's backers claim this proves that FC opens a door to spiritual worlds! Is this what emunah is based on?

It also should be no surprise that the FC book has an quazi-paranoid agenda that claims that only charedim can bring moshiach. Of course, you'd then have to believe the testimony of a ten month old down syndrome baby. That's the source of Daas Torah. The toddler has spoken, and you're in cherem!
Alter Neulander | 11.21.05 - 2:19 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FC's backers are clueless. I asked on the charedi supporter for scientific evidence. He sent me a scientific article that provided little such proof. The experiment in the article worked as follows. The children were shown a randomly chosen picture and their responses on the keyboard was recorded. Some children were assisted by facilitators and some were not. The facilitators were not shown the picture. The results were that both groups failed miserably. However the failure rate of the facilitated group was significantly less than the non-facilitated group. Even this little bit of evidence fall apart due a suspicious aspect of the experiment. Though the facilitators were not shown the randomnly chosen picture, they were given beforehand a list of possible images that would be shown. Why? Wouldn't such prior information taint the results? It seems the experiments purpose used a methodology that would guarantee them some rate of success.
Alter Neulander | 11.21.05 - 2:43 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is there any point to this post aside from belittling a few Gedolim?

I ask because I think that would signal a policy change for this blog.
LkwdGuy | 11.21.05 - 2:54 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Fac...d_communication
there seems to still be some debate regarding the practice
Jewish Exile | Homepage | 11.21.05 - 3:04 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Why are only the gedolim who gave FC tepid support bashed here and all those professinals who made money off it ignored?"

Because the hucksters wouldn't be raking it in without the facilitation of rabbis ignorant of science. There is a popular pesach guide that for years has been promoting homeopathy. I recall some years ago seeing an ad for homeopathic remedy to provide an easy fast that included a haskomoh. Of course the ad had no approbation by any medical doctor. It doesn't take much imagination to think of a realistic situation where halacha could be violated due to scientific ignorance.
Alter Neulander | 11.21.05 - 3:08 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rav Weintraub most definitely supported the validity of "prophecies' from autistic children. It is documented in Chaim Rapoport's monograph, The Messiah Problem.

(Since we have mentioned the Messiah, let's turn this comments section into another fight with Habad Messianists and apologists. CH, Oysvurf, Meshichist, you guys out there?)
nachum | 11.21.05 - 3:16 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LkwdGuy,

I'm sorry, but anyone who readily and publicly espouses such foolishness loses the title of gadol in my book.

The title gadol is not self-imposed. The is imposed by rank-and-file frum Jews who recognize a person's greatness. Those who self-assuredly pronounce anti-scientific "kefira" are not gedolim. Period.

Let them retract their foolishness, and we may reconsider. In the meantime, it is a mitzvah to seek the truth, and to reject falsehood and foolishness.
GadolAnon | 11.21.05 - 3:38 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"there seems to still be some debate regarding the practice"

And there still are flat-earthers.
And Uri Geller still has followers.
And Jon Edward still rakes it in.
And See-Clearly is still charging people $300+ for crackpotttery that's been around for over a century.
Debate is no evidence of substance.

You should take a closer look at the footnotes. The wiki article states that "However, some controlled studies did show positive results [9]." But if you look at note nine, only one published study of substance is cited. The rest are either negative, anectdotal, or non-scientific. The one positive study I have already dealt with that study above. The methodology was suspiciously flawed- it reduced an otherwise blind test to multiple choice. Furthermore, the resulting numbers while relatively (i.e. compared to the control group) impressive were quantitively (i.e. intrisically) evidence of failure.
The equivalent would be results of a study of a diet plans in which 5% of the dieters lost weight compared with 3% of the non-dieters. The dieters are 66% more successful than the non-dieters but they still could use some liposuction.

There is no real debate amongst scientists. There simply is no evidence. The whole FC claim (at least when applied to autism) is a apriori false since it defies fundamental facts we know about the disorder. There may be debate between morons and scientists, but who cares?
Alter Neulander | 11.21.05 - 3:44 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is there any point to this post aside from belittling a few Gedolim?

The post does not belittle Gedolim. Although the update does a little, sort of.
Gil | Homepage | 11.21.05 - 3:45 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The post does not belittle Gedolim. Although the update does a little, sort of.

Sorry. I didn't see where the post ended and the update started. So is there a policy change? Can you provide a list of which Gedolim are now fair game so I don't overstep the bounds of this blog.
LkwdGuy | 11.21.05 - 3:49 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"In the meantime, it is a mitzvah to seek the truth, and to reject falsehood and foolishness."

And if you do it nicely, it's a hiddur mitzvah.
Alter Neulander | 11.21.05 - 3:49 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What do you mean? You put up your comment long before the update!

There is no policy change. Please explain why asking a question about a position held by Gedolim and whether they have changed their minds is belittling. I don't understand.
Gil | Homepage | 11.21.05 - 3:50 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Yated article states that "Deftly, and in an amazingly thorough manner, Rabbi ****** refutes the allegations of the scientific disclaimers of FC, one by one, presenting solid, documented proofs of the validty of FC".

This is even funnier that the following:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Breatharian
Anonymous | 11.21.05 - 3:54 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think my computer is not updating for some reason. I still can't see any update. Whatever.

There is an obvious insinuation here, at least in my mind. The point seems to be that the mentioned Gedolim either have no clue about what they are giving haskomos to or that they will stubbornly refuse to admit that they are wrong. Both of these point may be valid but they are points that you have not allowed others to make on this blog in the past. Thus my question, is there a policy change.
LkwdGuy | 11.21.05 - 3:56 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's your imagination.

It was an honest question. Your assumption that they are too stubborn to refuse to change their minds or are clueless shows your lack of faith in them. YOU are the one implicitly insulting them. Not me.
Gil | Homepage | 11.21.05 - 3:59 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i think this comment section has gone far enough. what about a little respect?

anyway,

D. Bicklen, "Communications Unbound," Teacher's College Press, New York, NY (1993) writes "several students typing completely independently; of these, all had been facilitating for more than three years." this is called fading.
talmud | 11.21.05 - 4:01 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's your imagination.

I did leave that possablity open.

It was an honest question.

OK. chatassi.
LkwdGuy | 11.21.05 - 4:09 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't even understand your havah amina, but I'll drop it.
Gil | Homepage | 11.21.05 - 4:10 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"D. Bicklen, "Communications Unbound," Teacher's College Press, New York, NY (1993) writes "several students typing completely independently; of these, all had been facilitating for more than three years." this is called fading."

1) This is not published in a respect peer reviewed journal. It is a book.
2) It is anectdotal.
3) It is not a scientific study.
4) Bicklen is not an independant observer. He has financial incentives to promote FC.

Pray tell- kids learn to speak before they can read or type. Why should believe that FC can reverse this process?
Alter Neulander | 11.21.05 - 4:22 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Very interesting piece about R' Shlomo Zalman. Don't spread the word too far, otherwise he'll be put in cherem and his books may be burned
General Arafat | Homepage | 11.21.05 - 4:31 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How can they have been typing "independently" if they had been facilitating?
Nachum Lamm | 11.21.05 - 4:36 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Has there been any retractions from the Gedolim who supported Facilitated Communication?

A more basic question is "Do they still support it?" If not, why did they change their minds. If they did change their minds, how did they inform people of that.

There is much to learn in how Godolim decide to accept what experts tell them. As non-Godolim but aspiring Talmedei Chachomim, we should analyze this carefully to learn from it.
D | 11.21.05 - 4:53 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

" How can they have been typing 'independently' if they had been facilitating?"

The wording in the phrase was clumsy. What he means is that they used to need facilitators and now they can type alone.
Anonymous | 11.21.05 - 5:03 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lkwd guy and Gil:

I think from the fact that other posts went straight into gedolim-bashing mode, it's clear that Lkwd guy was not alone in seeing an (unintended) implication in the original post that the gedolim are "too stubborn to refuse to change their minds or are clueless." Lkwd guy was just the only one seemed bothered by it.

I think the main reason that there has not been any retractions regarding FC is that rabbinic leaders are concerned, first and foremost, about promoting torah and mitzvos. If FC somehow becomes a prominent tool supporting anti-torah arguments, the retractions will come swiftly.

I think that an informative comparison can be made to Torah codes. The cooling (though not elimination) of rabbinic support for that only really started after Christians started finding coded references to Jesus, not after the scientific validity of the original methodology was severely challenged.
tzura | 11.21.05 - 5:05 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I think the main reason that there has not been any retractions regarding FC is that rabbinic leaders are concerned, first and foremost, about promoting torah and mitzvos."

And not with anything else? That throws a wrench into the whole Daas Torah ideology- doesn't it?

"I think that an informative comparison can be made to Torah codes. The cooling (though not elimination) of rabbinic support for that only really started after Christians started finding coded references to Jesus, not after the scientific validity of the original methodology was severely challenged."

Ridiculous. Misuse of Torah Codes has nothing to do with claims of it's illegitimacy. The critiques of the Codes have mainly been mathematical in nature. That some Christians misuse Codes to promote their own agenda is irrelevant. Are we to throw T'Nach out because Christians find references to Jesus? Rejection of the Codes for such a reason would be a chilul Hashem.(We should reject them for legimate reasons. Either because the science is wrong, or because such a method of interpetation has no Torah legitimacy. )
I'm not saying that your report is wrong. I just doubt it because it's so disturbing.
Alter Neulander | 11.21.05 - 5:28 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About 10 years ago Rav Nissim Karelitz wrote against FC.

That is probably the only documented statement.
Anonymous | 11.21.05 - 5:37 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Yated article states that "Deftly, and in an amazingly thorough manner, Rabbi ****** refutes the allegations of the scientific disclaimers of FC, one by one, presenting solid, documented proofs of the validty of FC".

That was a misprint. They must have meant "Daftly"...
GadolAnon | 11.21.05 - 5:51 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alter -
I'm talking about *motivations*. Bible code references to Jesus could possibly be successfuly argued against on methodological grounds, in the same way that Jews have been refuting classical Christian texual exegesis on technical grounds. It could. I don't know. Christian exegesis of Tanach is wrong not because it talk about Jesus, but because it's bad scholarship. However, my guess is that the Medieval Jewish leadership mainly took the time to detail the refutations of Christian exegesis because it was made to be a prominent tool againt Torah and Mitzvos.

I'm just pointing out that the christian take on codes had a much more immediate impact on influencing what rabbis endorse than the pilpul of probability theory. The danger posed by the Christian take on codes was the motivation that some rabbis needed to take a closer look at the methodogical critique. There's nothing necessarily wrong with this. Unwelcome results are used as an indication (though not proof!) of bad methodology by scientists the world over. The materials and methods section of scientific papers is only read carefully if you want to reproduce and extend on the authors' results or if you're bothered by their results and don't want to believe it.

Also this is what I was told by a rosh yeshiva of a BT yeshiva who was a fomer fan of codes.
tzura | 11.21.05 - 6:10 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alter Neulander,

If any person has a problem with daas torah because of the acceptance of FC after it was scientifically discredited they are missing a lot of other, more fundamental challenges that have arisen (and are well known) against that concept. [Not to mention its lack of historical precedent.]

I think the major issue is why people are so desperate to find reasons to believe that they cling to such 'reasons' long after the valid reasons for doing so are gone. This hunger for validation (that arises even to the degree that people undermine their own credibility) is the troubling feature, especially when its coming from sources that, we are told, view their own sphere as paramount.

Most of the scientific framework challenging the validity of FC was available before it became a major fad in the Orthodox community, i.e. there was no good excuse for people taking this seriously at any point other then that it took Israel a longer time to accept FC was discredited (See the date of the APA statement R' Gil cites to).

-How Autism Got To Be Gilgul
HAGTBG | 11.21.05 - 6:12 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All this points again to THE GADLUS of R.Shlomo Zalman.-and his collaboraton with Professor Steinberg.They also collaborated on brain stem evaluatin with experiments on sheep.Professor Steinberg is the author of billiant Encyclopedia of Jewish Medical Ethics.
R.Shlomo believed in 'ayn ledayan ela ma sheanov ro-os.'
Anonymous | 11.21.05 - 6:36 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

sorry that was me.
daat y | 11.21.05 - 6:38 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

tzura,
Well written and I agree. But in the narrow area of motivation as you yourself wrote. Indeed, on its own, abuse of the Codes, may be reason enough to reexamine the legitimacy of Codes. The problem is that such reexamination may appear to cynical.
That kfira is more dangerous than stupidity is certainly true in this situation where 1) the harm of such stupidity is no more than a well-intentioned wasted of time, and 2) irresposible reliance on Codes in kiruv work is more than offset by other educational material.
I suppose a solution would be to include scientific critique as a major part of any rabbinic opposition to the Codes. That way all bases are covered.
Alter Neulander | 11.21.05 - 7:44 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"If any person has a problem with daas torah because of the acceptance of FC after it was scientifically discredited they are missing a lot of other, more fundamental challenges that have arisen (and are well known) against that concept. [Not to mention its lack of historical precedent.]"

I agree 100 percent! My point was not that the incorrect endorsement of junk science disproved Daas Torah. Rather the statement (that I responded to) itself indicated that were areas that the Gedolim don't exercise authority. But Daas Torah implies that the Gedolim have authority in all areas. If Daas Torah were truly in effect the quotaton would have been:

"I think the main reason that there HAVE been retractions regarding FC is that rabbinic leaders are authorized with not only promoting torah and mitzvos, but profane matters as well."

My point was not concerned with whether the haskomas were right or wrong. Though, that fact too also is problematic to Daas Torah ideology.
Alter Neulander | 11.21.05 - 7:55 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FC cannot be scientifically proven any more than Intelligent Design can be. It is a spiritual phenomenon. The FC book's explanation is that the communication originates with the soul of the subject. Thus arguments such as those made by Alter are not material.

And btw, FC has already been used to advance Christianity. A little searching on the web will reveal that a book or two has been written on the subject.
Big Maybe | 11.21.05 - 9:11 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Big Maybe,

FC is a procedure; its efficacy is testable. It either achieves results (improved communication with the subject person) or it does not.
HAGTBG | 11.21.05 - 10:56 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1) This is not published in a respect peer reviewed journal. It is a book.

Your point being? Have you read a PRV? Do you think something like this would get published?

2) It is anectdotal.

Should I begin to list you the psychologists that based their theories off case studies? Heres a few names:

Freud,
James,
Wundt,
Nearly every European Psychologist
and perhaps the most important Psychologist of all time: Piaget.

3) It is not a scientific study.
See above. And, Mr. Scientist, pray tell how you could conduct a scientific study to the above phenomenon.

4) Bicklen is not an independant observer. He has financial incentives to promote FC.
The AP recently reported about an anonymous survey that showed that nearly all scientists base their findings on the agenda of those who pay them. what you are saying is a problem -- but do not, for one moment, forget that this pathology affects all scientists.

and furthermore, i suggest all our experts on autism check out the DSM characterization of an aspect of the disease: "in individuals with adequate speech, marked impairment in the ability to initiate or sustain a conversation with others."
coupled with the fact that hearing may even be painful for many autistic individuals, that they would more readily learn by typing is no stretch at all.

(qed?)

but i can see your minds are made up!
talmud | 11.21.05 - 11:22 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and, whether you agree or disagree with the sages here, i just find it highly amusing that such irresponsible (note my careful choice of word) speech is tolerated on a site that recently placed the "responsible speech" banner on the site!

disagreement can be respectful and disrespectful. much of what i've read (to my dismay, gil) falls in the latter type.
talmud | 11.21.05 - 11:29 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"FC cannot be scientifically proven any more than Intelligent Design can be."

Yet it's been scientifically disproven again and again. And the one (as far as I know) article that 'supports' it was written by somewho who disagrees with you and claims that it can be proven. In any case, as I've shown, the article is flawed and inconclusive.
Alter Neulander | 11.22.05 - 8:41 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

talmid,
Anectdotal evidence is simply trumped by rigorous scientific study. FC has been disproven again and again. The one paper that supports it was flawed. The flaw is not subtle- it's obvious and therefore suspicious. Giving the facilitators the answers, indicates the experiment was 'cooked' to produce positive results. These are all facts, they can't be disputed. The conclusion from these facts flows naturally. If you want to come to a different conclusion, they you've got to do better than speculation.
Alter Neulander | 11.22.05 - 8:48 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

talmid,
Speaking of anectdotes, are we to believe all those visions of Mary that occur from time to time? That's anectdotal!
Alter Neulander | 11.22.05 - 8:49 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"And, Mr. Scientist, pray tell how you could conduct a scientific study to the above phenomenon."

The flawed Cardinal study could be reproduced without giving the facilitators the answers. The facilitators should be foreigner who have no knowledge of the child's language. Other precautions against fraud could also be implemented. The results should not just be positive, but be consistent with FC claims.
Alter Neulander | 11.22.05 - 8:52 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

" It is a spiritual phenomenon. "

FC detractors:
"The results of FC are inconsistent with what we'd expect from the child, had she been able to talk. Therefore, FC results must be influenced by the facilitator."

FC charedi supporters:
"The results of FC are inconsistent with what we'd expect from the child, had she been able to talk. Therefore, FC results must be influenced by prophecy."

I'm not making up the latter point. It boils down to 'Credo quia absurbdum'- 'I belive it because it's absurd.' Don't tell me that's not kfira!
Alter Neulander | 11.22.05 - 8:56 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"and, whether you agree or disagree with the sages here, i just find it highly amusing that such irresponsible (note my careful choice of word) speech is tolerated on a site that recently placed the "responsible speech" banner on the site!"

I have not made any remarks against Gedolim. I've just explained that FC is nonsense, irresponsible and ultimately CRUEL to parents of these children. Believe me, I know what I'm talking about. It's realy disgusting to tell these parents that they should be thankful because they have a child who is a prophet.
Alter Neulander | 11.22.05 - 9:01 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Your point being? Have you read a PRV? Do you think something like this would get published?"

I don't know what your talking about. Your implications are beyond what you've written. Please elaborate.
Alter Neulander | 11.22.05 - 9:02 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The insensitivity to those families struggling daily with autistic kids is just appalling. How do you suppose they feel when their little gift from God is unable to channel His messages?
dov weinstock | 11.22.05 - 9:11 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The insensitivity to those families struggling daily with autistic kids is just appalling. How do you suppose they feel when their little gift from God is unable to channel His messages?"

I hope you're not serious.
Alter Neulander | 11.22.05 - 9:28 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is there any difference between believing that retarded children relay messages from G-d, or believing in G-d? The spiritual plane does not present itself to scientific study and anlysis. Once you are open to believing in things with no scientific evidence, there's not much difference.
Has Been | Homepage | 11.22.05 - 9:40 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Beware of experts outside their area of expertise.
D | 11.22.05 - 9:41 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

coupled with the fact that hearing may even be painful for many autistic individuals, that they would more readily learn by typing is no stretch at all.

Talmud, there are several flaws with this statement such that I doubt it reflects your actual knowledge of FC:

1. In FC, the aim is that the subject person is to use the keyboard to respond to verbal questions (with the aid of a facilitator, see below). So sound is not really at issue.

2. FC was often used on nonverbal participants and this indeed was what made it initially the subject of much press. Imagine, people trapped in a prison of their own mind suddenly free.

3. The person is not "readily learn[ing] by typing" but typing with the aid/aim of the facilitator. Whether it is 'aid' or 'aim' is the subject of the debate. And of course, the current studies indicate that FC is actually the subconcious typing of the facilitator.

4. One last thing: Isn't it interesting that only the autistic members of the frum community (or those whose faciltator is frum) are discussing gilgul, etc. while in other communities the autistic are suddently saying things that one would expect as issues there. Doesn't that say something too about the validity of these assertions?

Again, the real shame is that FC was discredited as a procedure before it became an issue in the Orthodox world. That so many in the Orthodox world grabbed at a procedure that was already discredited as a means for chizuk is disturbing because it indicates that people are not satisfied with what they are otherwise hearing.
HAGTBG | 11.22.05 - 9:55 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A certain very prominent MO rabbi put out a piece a few years ago suggesting Yitzchok had Down's Syndrome. Turns out it was plagiarised from a Reconstructionist magazine. My point: not all fools are charedim. And I wanted to tie the discussion in to the parsha.
Eskimo | 11.22.05 - 9:59 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Is there any difference between believing that retarded children relay messages from G-d, or believing in G-d?"

Yes.
Alter Neulander | 11.22.05 - 10:08 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"My point: not all fools are charedim."

Yes. And not all charedim are fools.
Alter Neulander | 11.22.05 - 10:08 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Another fatal flaw in FC's claim is the following. If these children are inspired what to type by Heaven, why aren't they inspired how to type as well? Why do they need a facilitator? If they are being guided from Above, why doesn't that guidance cause them to type unfacilitated?
Alter Neulander | 11.22.05 - 11:42 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Yes.

How so? Once you dispense with Scientifically testable evidence as your guide, then how do you determine which supernatural claims are real, and which are false? Number of people who believe in it? 2 billion people believe in Jesus. Antiquity of belief? Ghosts have been around for a long while. Mesorah? I don't think the mesorah had much to say about FC. (Though the Gedolim were okay with it).
Has Been | Homepage | 11.22.05 - 11:48 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> If these children are inspired what to type by Heaven, why aren't they inspired how to type as well?

We have to make our hishtadlus too.
Has Been | Homepage | 11.22.05 - 11:49 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

" In FC, the aim is that the subject person is to use the keyboard to respond to verbal questions (with the aid of a facilitator, see below). So sound is not really at issue."

but learning to speak is. i was commenting on someone's claim that we would expect autistic children to learn how to speak before they learn how to type because that's how everyone else does it. what i said was just one reason as to why the above is an unsound display of logic.

i don't think you truly believe the rest of your points as a) they aren't points or b) (as is the case with 4) you don't really expect a non-Jew from china to speak about gilgul do you?

not that i am haredi, but i'm surprised that you all don't see the hypocrisy. if, between haredi and MO, there is any group that has looked to other modes of thought to find fulfillment, it is unquestionably the MO movement (and, as someone who considers himself MO, i can't really consider this as too much of a bad thing). you don't find so called "kefira libraries" (what we call the second level of gush's library) or woman's torah readings in the charedi world. something i've noticed is that in the MO world, we are so quick to point fingers -- we want to seem modern before orthodox, instead of modernized orthodox (i think this is precisely one of the reasons rabbi lich. calls MO "centrist orthodoxy."

and, furthermore, cases of fading have been recorded. you can't really conduct a study of something like that except to find the proportion of cases of autistics who have been able to type without help.

as someone who's trying to have a balanced perspective on this, i will readily admit that FC isn't a fact. but based purely on the fact that there is a European/American divide on the subject and based on what I have read, and based on the fact that man has a tendency to look for evidence that supports something he wants to believe to be true (or false) -- based on all of these things, even though it seems to me that FC is a real possibility to me, I can admit that it might not be true.

of course it doesn't go both ways, because those haredis are crazy!
talmud | 11.22.05 - 12:29 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

General question for Rav Student: seeing as how there have been some important rabbis that have questioned things like Israel's redemption and G-d not coming down to earth in a human form (I think Rambam even quotes a Rabbi about a halachic matter, who said that G-d could come down to earth in human form if he wanted to) but today we can't have these opinions and consider them heretical, why, then, does a former sage saying something mean that it is a stance we can accept today?

sorry if my question isn't well phrased, i've gotta run. i look foreward to your answer.
talmud | 11.22.05 - 12:33 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"How so? ...Mesorah? I don't think the mesorah had much to say about FC."

Exactly.
1) It's not in the mesorah.
2)It has not been proven scientifically.
3) It has been disproven scientifically.
4) It is intriscally inconsistent.
Alter Neulander | 11.22.05 - 12:36 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

" 'If these children are inspired what to type by Heaven, why aren't they inspired how to type as well?'

We have to make our hishtadlus too."

What effort are you refering to? To do what? What are you talking about? The discussion has nothing to do with hishtadlus!
Alter Neulander | 11.22.05 - 12:38 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

you don't find so called "kefira libraries" (what we call the second level of gush's library) or woman's torah readings in the charedi world.

Maybe you don't but I do. Just one tiny example of many: I was learning with a friend one night in his father-in-law's house after my friend had his first child. His father-in-law is in the jewelery business and dresses Hasidish. I went to take out a sefer from a back room and found shelves full of JTS books.

You know that one of the editors of the journal Yeshurun used to be a librarian at JTS, right?
Gil | Homepage | 11.22.05 - 12:57 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

General question for Rav Student: seeing as how there have been some important rabbis that have questioned things like Israel's redemption and G-d not coming down to earth in a human form (I think Rambam even quotes a Rabbi about a halachic matter, who said that G-d could come down to earth in human form if he wanted to) but today we can't have these opinions and consider them heretical, why, then, does a former sage saying something mean that it is a stance we can accept today?

A contemporary posek has the right to rule on such subjects but he will undoubtedly take into account the extant literature on the topic.

In the Slifkin issue, we have contemporary and recent rabbis who have supported R. Slifkin's stances. To say, "No one can hold like that rishon" is different from saying "No one can hold like this Gadol who was widely respected and passed away only a few short decades ago."

I have never disputed the right of posekim to rule that R. Slifkin's positions are kefirah. I have only pointed out that there is large room for other posekim to disagree.
Gil | Homepage | 11.22.05 - 1:02 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Talmud,

Are you familiar with FC and the circumstances in which it often was provided?

I don't think you truly believe the rest of your points as a) they aren't points or b) (as is the case with 4) you don't really expect a non-Jew from china to speak about gilgul do you?

Certainly, the points I raised were valid. One can not expect a nonverbal person to speak so whether they enjoy sound is irrelevant. One CAN and indeed WOULD expect a person from China to talk of gigul IF we are talking of prophecy, a connection to the Divine or other direct access to the Truth. But that is not the case so we are left within 2 other options - (i) it being the facilitor subsconciously steering the autistic person's hands, or (ii) the autistic person having a self-imposed belief that he or she is a gigul and prophet and can communicate such high thoughts despite an inability to dress or perform basic functions other then via FC. Which is most likely should be clear. (Note this particular argument would be if the science was indeterminate, in fact the studies right now discredit FC).

not that i am haredi, but i'm surprised that you all don't see the hypocrisy. if, between haredi and MO, there is any group that has looked to other modes of thought to find fulfillment, it is unquestionably the MO movement

The issue is not access to outside modes of thought but the desperation that leads to grasping for straws. Such desperation indicates intellectual dissatisfaction with what is otherwise available. MO might have that desperation too. So? They were not the ones caught up in FC and creating a false story of gigul and reincarnation several years after the general scientific establishment determined FC did not work.

as someone who's trying to have a balanced perspective on this, i will readily admit that FC isn't a fact.

Two things:

First, and again, FC is a procedure. It either works or does not. That is the only fact that counts.

Second, balanced also means saying something works when it does or does not when it doesn't. At this point, as it has been for over a decade, the burden is very much on those pro-FC. Yet they have not risen to the challenge.

and based on the fact that man has a tendency to look for evidence that supports something he wants to believe to be true (or false),

Talmud, you are missing the forest from the trees. When FC was first becoming popular no one WANTED to discredit it. Like I said before, people thought they were bringing the living dead to life. People were amazed and thrilled when they began gettting responses from people that nothing else worked for. But people began to doubt as time went on and the answers seemed to perfect, to based on the facilitator. And then the science did not back FC up. And because FC is very expensive and time consuming, it then quickly died.

The issue of gilul came up after FC was already discredited generally and had no
HAGTBG | 11.22.05 - 1:03 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

". i was commenting on someone's claim that we would expect autistic children to learn how to speak before they learn how to type because that's how everyone else does it. what i said was just one reason as to why the above is an unsound display of logic."

Why unsound? Speaking takes several skills. So does typing. Why should autistic kids suddenly develop language skills when they had little before? In addition to basic language skills, typing requires reading ability (and these kids had none before) and the mechanical coordination to actually hit the intended key. All this they can do suddenly, but they still can't speak (which is a simpler skill)? It may not as rigorous as geometry, but it's sound reasoning, or at the least provided overwhelming justification to be suspicious that FC is a fraud.

Understand, that the disability is one of language- not of speaking. The key is that autistic kids who can speak often use language idiosyncratically. That such idiosyncracies don't show up in FC indicates it's not the kids who are communicating. This is an undeniable fact and is indeed admitted by charedi FC supporters. They just claim that this FACT proves that FC is supernatural. The problem then is: if there's supernatural assistance in typing, why do the kids need a facilitator?
Alter Neulander | 11.22.05 - 1:05 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

bearing on the debate of FC's validity so far as I know.

Do you really think people would shut the autistic up and remove FC just because the don't like what they're saying while billions each year are spent on them in alternative programs?
HAGTBG | 11.22.05 - 1:07 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Those of us that have read the literature, including posts by Ben Golden, the book "Secrets of the Soul", and the Gali book, are simply not bothered by a lot of the arguments raised here. I believe they are all handled adequately. A short comment on this post would not do them justice.

Nobody lives their lives based on scientific proof. If you had a good feeling that a stock purchase would make you money, you do so without scientific proof. If you suspected that a can of Coke was poisoned, you do not drink it, despite the absence of scientific proof.

Believing that FC could be true does not make one a fool, proof or no proof. Reading the profound material produced by FC sessions with some of these subjects is good for your soul. This much the gedolim have agreed on.
Big Maybe | 11.22.05 - 1:17 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Big Maybe,

I could write a lot. I will simply say your attitude towards an extremely expensive and time consuming procedure that involves the emotions of so many people, the welfare of these autistic persons and for which the science right now indicates does not work is extremely troubling.
HAGTBG | 11.22.05 - 1:27 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Reading the profound material produced by FC sessions with some of these subjects is good for your soul."

I've read plenty of that fluff. And it's little more than stereotypical mussar. The actual content may be worthwhile, but the source is dubious. The content is too advanced to be written by an autistic person and too mundane to be prophecy.
Alter Neulander | 11.22.05 - 1:37 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Nobody lives their lives based on scientific proof."

Then go ahead and drive intoxicated. The weatherman announces a blizzard go outside without a coat. Hang around bomb testing sites. Never use aspirin. Eat fried ribs every meal. Don't floss. Look directly at an eclipse. Worry about trolls. Leave teeth under your pillow. Dowse. And above all, listen to the voices. All of them.

Of course we do live many aspects of lives based on science. What aspects? Simply those are adressed by science, like FC. Those aspects that are issues of feeling, ethics, aesthetics or religion (for example) do not fall under scientific jurisdiction. Those aspects may be judged according the criteria you mention. But FC doesn't belong in that category.

"Believing that FC could be true does not make one a fool"

Of course not. One can believe in foolishness and not be a fool.

But I'll take your point as admission that FC is in fact unscientific.
Alter Neulander | 11.22.05 - 2:06 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hurrah, that is exactly my point. The discipline of science, worthy as it is, is simply not applicable to everything in life. Although to scientists, everything looks like a nail, to be hammered upon with the "unproven" mantra.

I don't need scientists to tell me that I love my wife, or that I shouldn't trust this particular car salesman, or that R' Elchanan Wasserman dealt with a dibbuk, etc. etc.
Big Maybe | 11.22.05 - 3:52 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Am I missing something?

Why can't a controlled experiment be performed?
Gil | Homepage | 11.22.05 - 4:02 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"But FC doesn't belong in that category."

Here is the point upon which we disagree. While others may have taken up FC as a means of communicating with disabled persons, or as a form of therapy, I take it only as messages from heaven (and so those messages self-describe). And for that, scientific proof is neither necessary nor possible.

"The content is too advanced to be written by an autistic person"

The messages claim to be from the person's soul. Not from his physical brain. I realize that may be hard to accept, from the pov of science, but that is their stated position.
Big Maybe | 11.22.05 - 4:06 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gil, what do you mean? Various ones were performed and we all know the results.
HAGTBG | 11.22.05 - 4:07 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Big Maybe,

If as you say, FC is access to heaven then why don't autistic children from non-frum communities using non-frum facilitators have discussions of gilgul?
HAGTBG | 11.22.05 - 4:10 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Big Maybe,

Sounds like ov and yidoni to me.

I just can not believe that any intelligent person can believe this stuff, after it has been so soundly disproven. I suggest you discuss it with your homeopath or witch doctor instead.

As Gil really wants to say: Oy gevalt, Meh hoya lanu.
GadolAnon | 11.22.05 - 4:26 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HAGTBG,

But they do. You should read the literature before casting doubt about the validity of FC.
Big Maybe | 11.22.05 - 4:26 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RSZA's attitude on the issue can be easily contrasted with those Talmidie Chachamim who saw FC as some of sort of miraculous communication from some otherwise severely mentally challenged children. RSZA asked an expert who he knew to provide him with an opinion as to the evidence pro and con. That was his shita in Psak on any issue that required scientific expertise.

IMHO, it is obvious that the supporters of FC in the Charedi world, including Mishpacha, which only recently switched its view on the issue, were looking for any methodology to support this technique, no matter how scientifically dubious and seemingly unsupported by the available scientific evidence
Steve Brizel | 11.22.05 - 4:48 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Big Maybe,

My connection to FC during the period people thought it worked is such that had this been coming up I'd have heard about it.
HAGTBG | 11.22.05 - 4:54 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How is it possible that this discussion has gone on for this long and the dikduk crew has yet to pop in and try to take it over?
Are you dikduk fellahs still out there?
David | 11.22.05 - 5:08 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Sounds like ov and yidoni to me."

Do you mean to imply you do not believe in magic?

All because science doesn't believe in it?

If you're going with Rambam on this, that's OK. If your personal belief system doesn't permit you to believe "this stuff", that's OK too. But your opinion alone doesn't make everyone else's belief invalid.



Big Maybe | 11.22.05 - 5:26 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

""The content is too advanced to be written by an autistic person"

The messages claim to be from the person's soul. Not from his physical brain. I realize that may be hard to accept, from the pov of science, but that is their stated position."

BM, you have conveniently ignored the second half of my sentence. That is intellectual dishonesty. Here again is the full sentence:

"The content is too advanced to be written by an autistic person and too mundane to be prophecy."

Perhaps, I should have 'unremarkable' instead of mundane. The first half of the sentence rejects any legimitimacy of FC from a earthly point of view. It compels any believer in FC to point to paranormal or spiritual causes. However, the latter part of the sentence indicates that there's nothing special about the content of these communications. Much of it can be heard in a typical mashgiach's mussar shmooz. The content can't come from the child; it can't come from heaven. It comes from the facilitator.

The other point that I've made that has not been addressed is: If this supernatural force can cause the child to type- why can't it cause the child tom speak? The answer: because the fascilitator (sic!) failed Ventiloquism 101.

What makes a supernatural explanation more compelling than a natural one?
Alter Neulander | 11.22.05 - 5:45 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Sounds like ov and yidoni to me."

"Do you mean to imply you do not believe in magic?"

Actually, my point was that Ov and Yidoni are usser, whether they work or not. By analogy, I would presume the same for FC. O & Y are but 2 examples of possibly "transcendental" witchcraft-like techniques that Jews are not permitted to become involved with. If you really believe that FC works as you say (prophesy etc.), you should be concerned...

And no, I don't believe in magic, but I do believe in the Rambam. Apparently, you are not a Rambam kind of guy.

IMO, this is exactly the type of foolish witchcraft-like activity that the Torah is trying to purge from the Jews.
GadolAnon | 11.22.05 - 6:32 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"...and too mundane to be prophecy."

This is obviously just your opinion and I didn't feel compelled to respond. Although if I were to return the favor (of labeling me intellectually dishonest), I would venture that perhaps you haven't attended enough of those mussar shmoozen to adequately judge the relative profundity of the FC messages. But I'm not that kind of guy.


Big Maybe | 11.22.05 - 6:45 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"...and too mundane to be prophecy"

BTW, the FC messages are not prophecy. They are basically straight mussar. You are probably confusing the actual content of the FC messages with the source cited by R' Yehuda Srevnik in B"B that prophecy can be found in the intellectually-disabled. But R' Y. S. doesn't quote any FC message in his book that contains anything that can be considered prophetic.


Big Maybe | 11.22.05 - 6:48 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Big Maybe,
I wrote that the content of FC was not remarkable- it's just mussar, and thus such mundane content implies a mundane source, rather than from a supernatural source.

You respond: "This is obviously just your opinion and I didn't feel compelled to respond. "

And then you add: "BTW, the FC messages are not prophecy. They are basically straight mussar."


Some years ago R' Sitzman (whom I assume is the Y.S. you refer too) emailed me details of two articles in the journal Mental Retardation. I've already dealt with these two articles above.
Thus Sitzman himself believes that FC is subject to scientific validation. I suppose you disagree with Sitzman. (If this is the case, then we agree on this point.)

According to the Yated: "... the purpose of the author of "Secrets of the Soul", Rabbi Yehuda Srevnik, a noted scientist, ...is to explain Facilitated Communication from a scientific... point of view "

From Amazon: "Rabbi Yehuda Srevnik has used both is scientific knowledge and his Torah scholarship to aid him in his fascinating research. "

So much for promotion. In the book itself, Srevnik spills much ink explaining that FC is not scientific and can only be explained spiritually.

So two questions still remains:
1) If this supernatural force can cause the child to type- why can't it cause the child to speak?
2) Where's the novelty in the messages? They seem to be suspiciously similar to something a facilitator would compose on his own. Why are convinced that it is fact from the child?
Alter Neulander | 11.22.05 - 8:40 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i know this sounds like a cop out, and i understand if you don't believe me, but i had a whole long post typed out which got lost.

perhaps my most important point is that a) we wouldn't expect a child in china to get nevua b) have studies been done that only test jewish children c) we can't do a "study" about fading -- it either happens or it doesnt happen d) case studies might be the best method because 1) what makes us think hashem likes being tests and 2) not all will respond to fc in the best way

e) it makes sense that, because werneckie's area never developed, that autistic people would have trouble speaking and no trouble moving to communicate. these skills reside in different areas of the brain (motox cortex, primarily, for movement and its connection with werneckie's for body expression) and also as further evidence that not all autistic children will develop the same way: 2 our of the 4 beef plants in canada were designed by a lady with autism. while she earned a PhD and is very successful, many with autism couldn't even comprehend an action like that.

to Rav Gil: something tells me jts books are different that what we'll find in the kefira library -- particularly because the kefira library goes against many of what even conservative jews stands for.


To respond with a question: Didn't Rambam, though, call a view of a big rav who lived either during his time or just before him kefira (because it contradicted one of his 13 principles)?

Another general question: Why did Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan ztl(or Rabbi Dovid Gottleib shlita) never get banned? It would see that this implies a fundamental difference between the two's work. what is this difference?
talmud | 11.22.05 - 8:50 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ive heard a variety of cases where RSZA asked for more information from scientists. There is the famous shaila of the disease gene that a couple had that they didnt want to pass on to a child. The parent said it was 50 - 50 chance. RSZA wanted a doctor to get him more details.
happywithhislot | Homepage | 11.22.05 - 9:08 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Talmud,

To be honest, I'm not 100% sure what you mean by fading. But whatever it is I don't see how it would explain in a satisfying manner why in nearly all the testing on FC, it turned out to be the facilitator subconciously guiding the subject person. (incidentally that deals with your point c2)

I find these attempts to defend FC by attacking traditional scientific methodology (your c1) to be absurd. You are not even trying to say it works for the masses but that G-d hides what FC uncovers for the few. Why? So that the 'testimonies' of the autistic be deemed authentic (and, one supposes, the credibility of the rabbis who backed them)?!

You said before you were trying to keep an open mind. Look at this now what you suggested: Option 1: Since 1994, G-d has been hiding the secrets revealed by FC. Option 2: FC turns out to be the facilitator subconciously guiding the subject person's hand.

Which is more rational? No more, how can we seriously be having a discussion on that.

Concerning your (a), (b), and (e). First of, we do not really know what causes autism or what it is precisely (hence you get scares about vaccines being the cause[another claim that testing has not borne out], etc.). Second, please don't point to the common similarities of autism and then also claim that we need to test Jewish autistic people separately. We both know there is no difference here between Jew and nonJew. Third, if autism is caused by certain spiritual phenomena we would expect such phenomena to be consistant across the board. China is India is the USA is Israel in this regard. Or the burden is on you to explain why not.

The lady you refer to with autism who revolutionized the beef industry, Temple Grandin (http://www.grandin.com/), is high functioning enough that FC, even if it worked, would not be needed by her. That is another thing you seem to have ignored. Some autistic people have mild cases and can function independently to various degrees of success. They do not need FC. They do not claim a fast link to the divine.
HAGTBG | 11.22.05 - 9:47 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have just had a chance to catch up with the comments and am appalled by one poster who defends facilitated communication on the ground that even if there is no evidence for its truth (or positive evidence of its falsity)as a therapy, it is still a means of receiving soul messages. What contempt for the financial sacrifices and emotional suffering of the parents of these children desperately seeking cures! What insensitivity to their sacrifices in trying to help their offspring! They are not looking for dubious mystical phenomena but for restoration of their children's functioning. Supporting therapeutic fraud is supporting therapeutic fraud. These comments remind me of one of the most unethical statements I have ever hear d in my many decades in the field. When I first began graduate school, I read a statement by a famous psychoanalyst that he regarded an analysis as successful if the patient gained insight even if he had the same symptoms he started with. I was appalled. Can anyone imagine a patient saying that he was happy with the insight he gained after untold thousands of dollars and many hours of treatment, even though he still suffered from all the pain that led him to seek treatment? It would be laughable nonsense if it were not a declaration of such cruel indifference to human suffering.
It is not accidental that the Torah precludes the very old from serving on the Sanhedrin.
Melech Press | 11.23.05 - 12:18 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Has there been any retractions"

HAVE there been. It hurts.
B.T.A. | Homepage | 11.23.05 - 12:20 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

fading is the allegedly recorded phenomenon of autistic people learning how to type by themselves after years of input. this is purported to be a gradual process, with not everyone achieving its completion.

as for what you ask: i do not know which is more rational in light of what i have read on the subject. amongst european scientific circles, fc is far more accepted and, added to that fact is that which i have read on phenomena like fading. a google search left me more confused than sure as to whether FC is a real force. personally (and i'm sure there are gedolim who would agree) even if FC is authentic, other ways for nevua are to be preferred. however, while i don't discriminate between jew and nonjew, it seems to me that the majority of profets we encounter (with notable exceptions, such a bilam) are jewish and, furthermore, if an autistic child were to get nevua, i'd imagine it's the jewish one surounded by mitzvot. this does not imply that autism is wholly (or at all) caused by spiritual phenomena. but spiritual phenomena can play a part in FC.

and I did not ignore that point about Dr. Terry Grandin. in fact, that was my point! my point was that different people are affected by autism differently, so it would be foolery to automatically lump them all together when it comes to fc.

a study that would make he more happy (but still not completely happy, because of the testing G-d issue) would be as follows: a longitudinal study with rotating volenteers and some people pretending to be autistic that consisted only of jews as autistic patients.
talmid | 11.23.05 - 2:34 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If anyone would care to read the article written by Dr. Steinberg, you will see that he wanted to run a study on Jewish children - the facilitators refused to partake, even when requested to do so by RSZA. So much for Da'as Torah.

Basically, it's all a bunch of baloney that uneducated people like to believe in as it makes them feel good about themselves/their beliefs/their lifestyles. There are some smart people who also get sucked in to stupidity, but mostly idiots.
General Arafat | Homepage | 11.23.05 - 3:44 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is a personal experience with FC in Israel. I have a profoundly retarded child, as does a charedi acquaintance. Several years ago that acquaintance invited a woman who claimed to be the principal of a school for autistic children in Kiryat Sefer to come to her home. For the fee of fifty shekels a pop she would do FC on our children. I felt transported to "la-la land". First her four year old child "answered" questions about how to deal with her older brother's problems in finding an appropriate yeshiva. Next,I attempted to test "my daughter" with questions that were approximately answered correctly but which could have been deduced by clever guesswork. For the rest of the session I was treated to a whopping high dose of mussar from "my daughter" about how I've forgotten the message of "Har Sinai" and am very materialistic. The fact is that despite my many faults I just happen to be a very un-materialistic person who lives a frugal lifestyle and copes with severe misfortune in life.
Now, what was that some of you were saying about the "kiruv" that FC enables? I can assure you that the session did nothing of the kind to me.
The enthusiasm of chareidim for the notion of FC reminds me of a recent documentary about the Aleh Institution for disabled children which noted that many chareidim were beginning to volunteer with that hitherto neglected population because the Gedolim have promised them that in return they will get shidduchim soon, or if already married, will bear healthy children.
Love for the disabled simply because they are sensitive human beings despite their diabilities is apparently not a motivator.
There has got to be some supernatural prophetic power or some supernatural promise of reward to stir people to act decently to this needy sector of our society.
That is just the bitter truth.
By the way, CP is brain damage resulting from oxygen deprivation before,during or immediately after birth. The damage can range from mild to severe and can be either physical only or both physical and mental. Likewise, autism does not necessarily entail mental retardation but often seems to. Some of the apparently cognitively impaired cases, however, could be of normal intelligence but just unable to respond normally to testing because of their autism. (i.e. communication disablities.)
francine marino | 11.23.05 - 4:52 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Talmud/Talmid,

There is no point in continuing this conversation. When you begin to seriously consider FC as a means of inspiring prophecy in some autistic and not others, some Jews and not others, of being covered up by G-d sometimes and not others, when your idea of a reasonable study is to focus on Jews only (as though autism is different in Jews), all to ignore the implications of various studies, this is not rational nor reasonable.

I wish you well but we are to far apart on what we consider reasonable to continue.

*******

Francine Marino,

Best of luck in a situation that I'm sure has not been easy. I did want to point out that, when it was prevalent as a method in the US, most facilitators did not know that they were influencing the outcome (especially not at first). There is a small chance the woman did not know she was the one giving you the answers.
HAGTBG | 11.23.05 - 8:46 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To all the readers who made it this far on this forum:

It is now over a decade FC became discredited in the general population, based on several studies, as a therapy for many nonverbal persons.

It has been known that the charedi circles have continued using FC long after, claiming in many instances that the autistic subject of FC was able to give insight into that which is 'beyond.'

What I've seen from the two defenders of FC here (Big Maybe and talmid/talmud), assuming them to believe as they argue, we see FC moving away from being a therapy to being a type of new kabbalic procedure.

They almost aren't even arguing that it normally works. Instead we see that FC could work differently on Jews.

To me the most indicative argument is the one by talmud/talmid that G-d would falsify the test results. Why would that be argued? It could only be argued if someone has forgotten that only 11 years ago, everyone did this and it 'worked' on the general population too (but with no discussion of gilgul). That argument only makes sense if we are no longer looking at FC as a therapy but as kabbalic procedure.

I wonder how FC will develop in the frum world and whether it will be dropped or transform into a kabbalic ritual, its origins forgotten, whose defenders will continue to ignore that all the studies show they are merely convincing themselves of something at someone elses expense.
HAGTBG | 11.23.05 - 9:26 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My wife is a social worker at an agency that deals with the pre-school population. I asked her whether FC is taken seriously in her community as a modality of treatment. She acknowledged that FC was highly controversial and that she was not at all surprised by the results reported by Dr Steinberg, a Talmid Chacham and pediatric neurologist.
Steve Brizel | 11.23.05 - 11:30 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Isn't R Srevnick one of the major people behind the now infamous "Torah codes"? FC seems like another variety of "Torah codes" aka "junk science" that is not subject to any scientific process or methods of proof.
Steve Brizel | 11.23.05 - 11:35 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"FC seems like another variety of "Torah codes" aka "junk science" that is not subject to any scientific process or methods of proof."

There may be some similarities between FC and TC. Both provide stunning results- the closest thing we get to an open miracle nowadyas. However, I would be much harder on FC for several reasons. It's much easier for a lay person to understand why FC is flawed and disproven. To understand the problems with TC needs knowledge beyond a bachelors in Math. Just mention the word 'metric' and you've lost 99% of the people. Also TC is just a couple skips from established mesorah. FC is several leaps away from tradition. TC had wide and committed support from Torah leaders. FC has passing approval from a handful of leaders. TC may a waste of time, but FC is cruel exploitation.
In summation, I would be less critical to belief in TC. But belief in shtuss like FC is not worth criticism.
Alter Neulander | 11.23.05 - 12:47 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Isn't R Srevnick one of the major people behind the now infamous "Torah codes"?"

Aside from the magic eight ball stuff, googling brings up nothing. I don't think he's known for anything else.
Alter Neulander | 11.23.05 - 1:59 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm owner of the "Autismlist" at yahoogroups and the interviewer of five adult autistics using FC that produced the book "QIM Tunes" (http://www.geocities.com/qim/qim_tunes.html). FC is simply a communication technique that has great value in caretaking autistics...no matter what one thinks of it's validity or content. Well before I believed in FC, I believed in it's value for the work I was doing. It's harmless and has great therapeutic value. That's the bottom line, and I know having worked with autistics for over thirty years.

That being said, FC is the greatest spiritual discovery of all time. You folks are ahead of the curve compared to others in the religious community, most of whom don't even discuss FC.

Thank you,
Tom Smith
Tom Smith | Homepage | 11.26.05 - 2:50 pm | #

Brian Henson Speaks No-Nonsense

Below is a post by Autie Brian Henson of my Autismlist at yahoogroups to my wonderful helper Judith Lecuyer (Tink). I post it here because my boys (autie's) in "QIM Tunes" would want me to. The original post was titled "If Only I Had Known":

Tink wrote:

"Now if all is predestined, and we just come down to
walk some pre-determined fate - then what sense
would it make?"

Brain Henson replies:

When you asked, "What sense would it make?"
I thought to myself, "Now, come to think of it, all sense,
is, indeed, nonsense, as nothing "makes" sense... there
is no manufacturing facility, even the mind, that can "make"
sense out of pure "nonsense"... Therefore, nothing, at all
(even "nothing") makes sense.

Are we trying our damndest to fool ourselves into the idea
that something, whatever it might be, "makes sense"? Are
we so gullible as to believe that even a statement that someone
else wrote, be it a person from a few thousand years ago,
or another person on this list, makes any "sense", at all?
Where, in creation, did we get that idea from? From God?

As some fundamentalists claim, "ONLY God can create--no
one outside of God can create anything--He alone is the divine
creator of everything!" To which I ask (to myself)--did God create
"evil"? Did God create "beauty"? Did God create "baseball"? Did
God create Rhett's Syndrome?... The questions will never end....

Others, though, add a clarification, and that is that God creates
but man recreates (not "re-creates", ...as the preposition, without
the hyphen in English means "again", as in the word "redo"--not
"re-do", or in the word "represent"--not "re-present"). Therefore
all of our recreation is when we recreate what God has already
created, and if physics was Einstein's recreation, so be it. There
is nothing limiting recreation to "sports and leisure"... away from
"work" and "household chores", at all. If a person finds recreation
in mowing the lawn or cleaning the floor, so be it. If a guard at a
penetenary finds recreation in his work, so be it, and even if a
soldier in Iraq finds recreation in pointing arms at insurgents, that
is his or her choice.

Perhaps many persons on the autistic spectrum find recreation
in challenging all pre-cultural assumptions or axioms that abound
in their culture--wherever they live. For others to deny them this
form of recreation would be the same as denying all baseball fans
the "right" to watch a baseball game ever again, or for a devote
Catholic the "right" to worship in mass, or for an atheist the "right"
to challenge the words "In God We Trust" on U.S. coins.

There is still the enigma, though, of those who find recreation in
"evil" itself... Again, to repeat the question, did God create "evil"?

...And, who, if I could ask, "created" FC? That person must, himself,
or herself, be "God"... even if Tom finds loads of recreation in FC.

Autism Diva: James Williams and Michelle Dawson

Autism Diva: James Williams and Michelle Dawson

Quoteznet ~ Companion To QIM Tunes

Quoteznet ~ Companion To QIM Tunes