tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post3955568848185035724..comments2023-10-10T08:02:18.073-04:00Comments on Rationally Speaking: Tear Down The Wall: Psychoanalysts Suppress Documentary on AutismUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-29056673995011631402012-05-28T06:39:59.351-04:002012-05-28T06:39:59.351-04:00This film is far too gentle with the interviewed p...This film is far too gentle with the interviewed psychoanalysts.<br /><br />http://www.supportthewall.org/2012/05/lexpress-when-a-psychoanalyst-think-mothers-are-reponsible-of-the-autism-of-their-children/colinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02300170717685050676noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-11396468626922593292012-03-09T16:19:41.963-05:002012-03-09T16:19:41.963-05:00While the rightness of the decision may be up to d...While the rightness of the decision may be up to debate, there are also good news from France. Yesterday, the health authorities issued a report to disadvise the use of psychoanalysis when dealing with autism. If you can read french, this article may be relevant for you :<br /><br />http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/societe/20120308.OBS3336/autisme-et-psychanalyse-le-scandale-enfin-mis-au-jour.htmlOrnithorynque consternéhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02656964216472588356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-45957660386949767742012-02-15T16:20:30.323-05:002012-02-15T16:20:30.323-05:00I am a geneticist, and when I read Maarten Boudry&...I am a geneticist, and when I read Maarten Boudry's report I was outraged by this court decision. I read the translation posted here (http://www.supportthewall.org/2012/02/exclusive-translation-of-the-court-decision-of-jan-26-2012-the-wall-sophie-robert-vs-psychoanalysts/), and I was inclined to take the filmmaker's side. Now, I don't agree with any of the psychoanalytical take on autism, but -in all fairness- I have to conclude that the director truly misrepresented what the plaitiffs said. <br />As an example, Mrs. Robert makes it sound like Mr. Stevens thinks the "blame" for an autistic child should be on the mother’s depression. When I read his answer in the context of her actual question, I understand that he believes that that baby isn't capable of relating to her mother. So the primary cause of autism lies in the baby.<br />A second example. Mrs. Robert edited the film to make it sound like Mrs. Solano-Suarez admits they don't know what they're doing when they are treating an autistic child. But the original question was different. Mrs. Solano-Suarez was saying is that psychoanalytical theory of autism is conjectural because it is impossible to psychoanalyze a child who cannot speak.<br />Again, I am a skeptical. I think these theories are bull. Autism is far more likely to be a purely organic disorder. However, I agree that Mrs. Robert's editing isn't fair to the actual views of the plaintiffs (based on a translation that is purported to be on her side). <br />As rationalists, we should try not to side with someone just because we share their opinions... especially when they are wrong.Matteohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06435005012515758337noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-2084008241548791672012-02-12T09:51:12.291-05:002012-02-12T09:51:12.291-05:00Hello,
Good blogpost. I followed the story for a ...Hello,<br /><br />Good blogpost. I followed the story for a while now. I even interviewed Sophie Robert for my French-speaking skeptical podcast "Scepticisme scientifique". That ruling is really worring for free speach in France, especially for documentary makers. How can you make a documentary if every people you interview can after sue you for the way you edited what they said? I think Sophie Robert editing was more than fair, but even if it wasn't, that's how you make documentaries. Investigative journalists should be really afraid of that kind of rulling. <br /><br />The psychoanalyst lobby is really strong in France. I think the French skeptical community is fighting here an uphill battle, against a very powerfull group of people. But things are slowly changing. Let's all support Sophie Robert's work.<br /><br />Skeptically yours,Jean-Michel Abrassarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07727238103453031813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-32043989545946089862012-02-11T08:02:14.783-05:002012-02-11T08:02:14.783-05:00Maarte, Just and advice. Be carefull when debating...Maarte, Just and advice. Be carefull when debating with PSA fans (it's like doing so with Creationists). The situation in Argentina is similar, but in the State I live (Santa Fe) there is a piece of legislation that forvides PSA from trating Autism. They protested of course, but the general notion by our society (I think) is that PSA is actually real psychology. I hope you can healp us to adress this issues that we are currentlly experiencing down here.sebastianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08804648918807461325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-60109909482451674562012-02-11T04:03:18.405-05:002012-02-11T04:03:18.405-05:00'Choosing' is a word to say it isn't t...'Choosing' is a word to say it isn't the fault of the parents...<br />If I may add, it is a forced choice than comes into manifestation when the child is introduced in the world of the others. That it is for a great part biological forced, isn't contradicting what you say.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-54214260252043438612012-02-10T08:44:38.525-05:002012-02-10T08:44:38.525-05:00By all means, read the French original (as I did),...By all means, read the French original (as I did), I was trying to do English readers a service! Of course, as expected, you don't provide a single instance of distortion. Nor do you you deal with my analysis of Steven's ludicrous charge of misrepresentation. Instead, you repeat the word "misrepresentation" over and again. In the sceptical literature, that is called an "argumentum ad nauseam".Maarten Boudryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11113078577333909378noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-51769827514949416742012-02-10T08:19:59.212-05:002012-02-10T08:19:59.212-05:00First of all, that "translation" is not...First of all, that "translation" is not a translation, it is a distortion made by supporters of Sophie Robert.<br /><br />The real arrest is here (sorry, I posted the wrong link in the previous post). People who are actually interested in the truth of the matter can verify everything there for themselves.<br /><br />https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B7s8QJ-76JxVYTkyNTkzODUtMGQxMy00ZTM4LWJmZGEtZDY0MzUyOTQyOGU4&hl=fr&pli=1<br /><br />Second, you cite exactly one word from the arrest, "polemic", en you misrepresent it. The film wasn't convicted for being polemic or partisan at all. It's director was convincted for absuse of confidence and misrepresentation. That's not my opinion, that's a fact, it's in the arrest. If Sophie Robert wants to make a partisan film against psychoanalysis, she is free to do so. She just has to do so honestly. <br /><br />It is telling that people like you, who are always talking about truth and rationality, don't bother with the truth when it doesn't fit your prejudices.Reinihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16560876014870888096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-76828526704211105212012-02-09T13:28:28.901-05:002012-02-09T13:28:28.901-05:00@ Daneel. Yes, I should've mentioned Argentine...@ Daneel. Yes, I should've mentioned Argentine. I know that used to be one of the strongholds as well, but I haven't checked lately... So is the situation still as bad?<br /><br />@ Reini. Have you actually read either the judge's ruling or my post? The alleged examples of misrepresentation in the ruling are either laughable, such as in Alexandre Steven's case, or come down to irrelevant nitpicking. Why don't you cite one of the so-called editing offenses, as I did, instead of simply referring to the judge's ruling? Of course questions and answers were edited through cut-and-paste techniques, Robert had several hours of footage. The real question is: was the editing of such nature that it distorted the views of the interviewees? The answer is: not at all, and certainly not to a degree that would call for a ban on the film. Anyone who consults the ruling can see for himself. For interested readers, here is an English translation: http://www.supportthewall.org/2012/02/exclusive-translation-of-the-court-decision-of-jan-26-2012-the-wall-sophie-robert-vs-psychoanalysts/<br />What "blatant lies" did Sophie Robert tell? Are you talking about the working title of the film that changed in due course (see ruling)? How devious! <br />By the way, my title is perfectly accurate and not in the slightest degree conspirational: psychoanalysts have suppressed a documentary by dragging the film maker into court and demanding huge compensation fees for reputation damage that, as it happens, was entirely self-inflicted. Have you actually seen the nonsense they are spouting about autism? <br />I rest my case: this ruling is a disgrace to free speech.Maarten Boudryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11113078577333909378noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-32501972680047287592012-02-08T22:58:42.696-05:002012-02-08T22:58:42.696-05:00My only hope is that this mess will be decided by ...My only hope is that this mess will be decided by a sound mind (given the fact pattern presented, I have no clue how the judge ruled against the filmaker). Psychoanalysis is simply not a tenable scientific theory. One wonders how on earth anyone can seriously advocate that an autistic child chooses his condition.Kevinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03628335967764806050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-18986303825571976452012-02-08T13:17:50.068-05:002012-02-08T13:17:50.068-05:00Sorry, please ignore the author name above the pre...Sorry, please ignore the author name above the previous post as well as this one. They are both by Anton FroeymanReinihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16560876014870888096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-50037653900979962152012-02-08T03:24:33.324-05:002012-02-08T03:24:33.324-05:00Maarten, you are simply lying. The psychoanalysts ...Maarten, you are simply lying. The psychoanalysts have given several examples of misrepresentation. Sophie Robert cut away some of the questions she originally posed and put others in their place in the editing process after. The concrete examples are in the arrest. <br /><br />http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.com/2012/02/tear-down-wall-psychoanalysts-suppress.html?m=1<br /><br />Also, Sophie Robert wasn't convncted for taking a moral stance, she was convicted for the blatant lies she told, for manipulation and misuse of the consent of the people she interviewed. This has nothing to do with free speach. Sophie Robert still is as free as anyone to make a partisan film about whatever she wants.<br /><br />If anyone wanted to see a piece of manipulationist propaganda, this text is a perfect example. You don't bother with the facts, you distort them to fit your own explanatory scheme, and you even suggest a completely unargumented conspiracy theory in your title (as if psychoanalysts controlled jurisdiction, come on, let's be be serious)<br /><br />I don't want to defend these psychoanalysts, or psychoanalysis as a whole. I want autists to get the best therapy or treatment they can, and if that means downgrading the role of psychoanalysis, that's fine by me. But the end doesn't justify the means, and that goes for you as well as for Sophie Robert. If you want to fight psychoanalysis, by all means do so. But do so honestly, with real arguments instead of propaganda.Reinihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16560876014870888096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-44929040998762628722012-02-06T17:00:25.856-05:002012-02-06T17:00:25.856-05:00Knowing very little about psychoanalysis, I have t...Knowing very little about psychoanalysis, I have to state that this thread infuriates me to learn about. I have an autistic nephew and I shudder at the thought that, in another country, he would be receiving treatment based on these people's theories. I would have to look more into this but, from a superficial view, I could imagine many similarities between their suggestions for treatment and how the United States treated Autistic children before we recognized Autism as a disorder.jermoxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12260256232935630988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-55460126080284707522012-02-06T14:52:50.338-05:002012-02-06T14:52:50.338-05:00"France is one of the last remaining bulwarks..."France is one of the last remaining bulwarks of psychoanalysis"<br /><br />You forgot Argentina. The Faculty of Psichology of the Buenos Aires Univeristy is filled with this pseudocientific nonesense. We are surrounded by lacanians, it's a disgraceAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07982409667756307764noreply@blogger.com