Child Development is Real Science

9 Nov

 

DIR/Floortime is Science, and we have trouble showing lawmakers that, because when they get shown charts, even if those charts are nonsensical, they believe they are “Evidence.” This part of a recent talk sets out to show that child development is science, and the Real Evidence Based Intervention in the field of Autism.

3 Responses to “Child Development is Real Science”

  1. marytormey November 16, 2013 at 8:56 am #

    Developmental science is going to have to step up the logic if it wants to be seen as real science. First of all, accurate measurement is necessary, don’t even try to measure things like empathy and friendliness, because they can not be measured objectively. Second, stop overgeneralizing. I am not a mouse or rat, I am a specific person with specific needs. Third the focus of controlling behavior is selfish and not in the best interests of children. It is wrong to try and change behavior without understanding it. Repetitive behaviors are a good thing and should be made more productive by slow transitioning, not extinguished. Forth give children the presumption of innocence, you need to be on their side. Recognize that trying to condition a person to do something they are not ready, for can do serious damage. Fifth understand that hidden physical differences interfere with health and senses, don’t assume a child is being defiant when they don’t do what you want, assume they need extra support.

    • Gil Tippy November 16, 2013 at 1:41 pm #

      Thank you, Marilyn. I deeply appreciate you taking the time to read, and comment on the blog. I agree whole heartedly that you are not a mouse or a rat. I think that the field of child development agrees with that, and my objection to the some of the behavioral rhetoric I have encountered is that they do think that human behavior and rat behavior can be thought of the same way.

      My argument is that behaviorists falsely, perhaps ignorantly, state that the only science is the simple experiment they do over and over.

      I read your website recommendation. You have correctly outlined the behaviorists’ position, and for that I am grateful. I want to understand what it is about being seen as an individual, with individual wants and needs, and with ideas at least as valid as my own, that you find objectionable?

      Gil Tippy

  2. marytormey November 16, 2013 at 9:54 am #

    Here is a website to help you think more logically, so you can call out the bad science. Appeals to tradition work well with politicians but science must move forward.
    http://marilynvossavant.com/logical-fallacies/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: