Ok, here we go....
Originally Posted by Night View Post
As a disorder unto itself, Dyslexia is appreciated as having a clinical basis for diagnosis. While I'm uncertain as to your offered pairing of superior intellect with those who suffer from Dyslexia, I can assure you that it retains a neurological contrast between those who suffer from it and those who do not.
The neurological contrast link is a hypothesis, it took an age to read and actually was full of lines like this
"It must be emphasized here that considerable caution is required when attempting to draw any explanatory model of dyslexia from the results reported below..."
and this
"Obviously, however, one important issue for future research will be to try and understand why a supposedly common basic temporal deficit yields such different manifestations and why these manifestations are so variable in their association with the reading impairment."
Also notable was the fact that the hypothesis consitantly referred to dyslexia as a disorder not a disibility.
If a disability it isn't, why then does Dyslexia have a clinically-supported neurological term defining its behavior?
Actually many things have neurological terms defining their behaivour that are not disibilities, for example "hypersexuality" and "hyposexuality". I do not mean either of these terms are realted to Dyslexia but they are, as examples, clinically-supported neurological terms defining their behaivour which are not considered disabilities.
Why then does it retain legal support protecting those who suffer from it from indemnity?
Pretty much for the same reasons that other marginalised persons would need it.
Perhaps the issue is one of semantic context. I've enclosed the Merriam-Webster definition for 'disability'.
dis⋅a⋅bil⋅i⋅ty /ˌdɪsəˈbɪlɪti/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [dis-uh-bil-i-tee] Show IPA
–noun, plural -ties for 2. 1. lack of adequate power, strength, or physical or mental ability; incapacity.
2. a physical or mental handicap, esp. one that prevents a person from living a full, normal life or from holding a gainful job.
3. anything that disables or puts one at a disadvantage: His mere six-foot height will be a disability in professional basketball.
4. the state or condition of being disabled.
5. legal incapacity; legal disqualification.
Ok so thats the definition of disibility, this is the defination of disorder
disorder
• noun 1 a lack of order; confusion. 2 the disruption of peaceful and law-abiding behaviour. 3 Medicine a disruption of normal physical or mental functions.
• verb bring disorder to
I would agree with the first purely on the basis of the way dyslexic children are being taught in the current schooling system. It confuses them hence the need for a better alternative.
Dyslexia is, from legal and scientific perspectives, a disability.
From a scientific perspective i have already argued above using your own link of the hypothesis.
From a legal point it does depend. Someone with mild dyslexia may not be considered to have a learning disibility where as someone who has severe dyslexia may. Some london boroughs do not even recognise dyslexia. They prefer instead to use the term specific learning difficulty or difference.
Altogether though you'd be hard pressed to call everyone with dyslexia "disabled"
The oxford dictionary also does not refer to it as a disibility
dyslexia
/disleksi /
• noun a disorder involving difficulty in learning to read or interpret words, letters, and other symbols.
— DERIVATIVES dyslexic adjective & noun.
— ORIGIN from Greek lexis ‘speech’ (apparently by confusion of Greek legein ‘to speak’ and Latin legere ‘to read’).
Aagain i would refer to the defination of disorder and be happy with accepting the first as afore mentioned.
Whether or not we individually choose to accept this fact is up to us.
I would also like to add a couple of little bits of info that i like.....
Dyslexia Association of Ireland Conference 20 October 2007
Opening Address by Turlough O’Sullivan, IBEC Director General
I will conclude by reiterating that dyslexia is not a condition that should
nowadays spell disaster for anyone. I emphasise that people who are
‘blessed with dyslexia’ as Richard Branson describes himself, are often
highly creative and talented and perhaps even better suited to the world of
business than others who don’t have the condition. In an economy where we
value knowledge and innovation, dyslexics can thrive and become leaders,
given the right opportunities. I encourage employers to accommodate and
support this strand of talent within the workforce, because without that
accommodation it is hard for many to succeed. I have no doubt that, even
within this room, we have future leaders and that in the future we will
wonder why dyslexia was ever considered unusual. I hope that we can have
a positive debate today and make some real progress in how to reach that
worthy goal.
Also this....
Positive Leaders: Majority of Millionaires Struggled in School
