Summary
In their article "Autism and Rhetoric" Paul Heilker and Melanie Yergeau attempt to change the readers view of autism. They view autism as a rhetoric, or a way of experiencing the world through language. People with autism don't view language in the same way or give language the same purpose, therefor they use it differently and talk differently. The authors argue strongly against the current public view of autism as a disorder, rather than a difference.
Synthesis
This article relates to the Wardle article because they both deal with something being viewed as wrong when it is just different. Wardle discusses how employees must adjust their writing style to fit a new workplace of be viewed as an outcast, even if their writing is good it may be viewed as defective, rather than just different. Heilker and Yergeau argue that autism should also be viewed as a different rhetoric, rather than a wrong one.
Review
I found parts of this article to be simple at some points and more difficult to understand at others. I think that the concept of autism being a rhetoric is an interesting one and would like to read a response to this article that argued against it and see which one makes stronger points.
No comments:
Post a Comment