One of these days, I may just bite the bullet and get a subscription to the Atlantic.
This article does not mention Asperger’s syndrome directly, but it does make me a lot more confident than I used to be about the “Darwinist” theory on the rise of Asperger’s… as well as other neurological “disorders”. It examines findings in science that may suggest that the same things that make people with ADD such a handful may, properly nurtured, make them more successful later in life, and may make them more useful for a variety of tasks – serving an evolutionary purpose that may help explain how we got this far in the development of civilization, not just their own existence. “Savant syndrome” may be the entire evolutionary point of Asperger’s and other such things.
As much as I’ve benefited and believed in it, the philosophical, logical side of me has long wondered why only (well, primarily) autistics promote the “neurodiversity” movement, claiming that their method of thinking is not necessarily bad, just different. People with ADD and dyslexics also think “differently”, so why aren’t they claiming they shouldn’t be “cured”, at least to the same extent? Is it because autistics still have several “beneficial” aspects to them, so autistics are still making a “good/bad” judgment and saying their way of thinking is worthy of being preserved because it’s beneficial and others aren’t? This article suggests other neurological disorders may indeed have their own claims to legitimacy.