Hacker News Reader

http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallaci...

Even ignoring the fact that DSM has major changes in every revision...

That's totally unhelpful. Use words to communicate, not confuse.

If I say "two plus two is five", and then explain it by counting "one, two, three, five", it's clear that I am using a different word, but I have the same idea as the common "two plus two is four".

When you seek to compate with a definition to empirical data, if the definition doesn't match, that means that the words we are using need to be clarified, not that the empirical data is wrong. (The data might be wrong, but "appeal to dictionary" is not a persuasive argument.

The problem is that the only broadly accepted definitions of autism we have are in the DSM-5 and ICD-10.

In a broader sense, this shows a fundamental flaw of psychology. I'm not saying I agree with the diagnostic criteria, but it's all we have.

Newer history can exclude a diagnosis based on older history.

And yet it seems to be wrong.

There is NO evidence of a cure for Autism. Not even this article is evidence.