7/30/2019 AutisticGenius.pdf

1/1

Michael Fitzgerald, author ofAutism andCreativity, says that some aspects of high-functioning autism and Aspergers syndromeenhance creativity. Because these develop-mental disorders are mainly genetic in originand largely affect men,he believes that creati-vity in a broader sense is predominantly theresult of genetic rather than environmentalfactors: The view that geniuses began theirlives made from the same material as the restof us is false. He then engages in retro-spective diagnosis to support such claims,declaring that several individuals with cre-ativity of genius proportionsfit the high endof the autistic spectrum. These include IsaacNewton, the philosopher Ludwig Wittgen-stein, mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan,Lewis Carroll, the poet W. B. Yeats, and poli-ticians Keith Joseph and Eamon de Valera.Apparently Hitler too had autistic traits.

Fitzgeralds thesis is not new. HansAsperger spoke of autistic intelligence asbeing intelligence oftrue creativity, addingit seems that for success in science or arta dash of autism is essential. Oliver Sackssuggested that Wittgenstein had autistic traits.So too did Einstein, van Gogh and possibly

Bill Gates, according to Temple Grandin,who is herself autistic. Asperger even notedthat the autistic mind is an extreme variantof male intelligence. Despite these earlierrevelations, Fitzgeralds tantalizing book isa must read, as are Simon Baron-Cohensbrilliant contributions to this area, such asThe Essential Difference(Perseus,2003).

The fact that genius can fall within theautistic spectrum challenges our deepestnotions of creativity. Are there two differentroutes to creativity: normal and autistic? Thenormal mind is good at recognizing the gistof something but poor at recalling details.This,I believe, is because the brain forms con-cepts or mental models that encapsulate thefamiliar. Concepts impart automatic judge-ments and confer intuition, but hide detailsfrom conscious awareness.As a result,we seethe whole but not the parts. In contrast, the

b ooks a nd a rt s

4 7 0 NATURE | VOL 428 | 1 APRIL 2004 | www.nature.com/nature

Autistic genius?A u t i sm an d C r eat i v i ty : I s Th er e a

Li n k b etween A u t i sm i n M en an d

Exceptional Abi l i ty?by Michael FitzgeraldBrunner-Routledge: 2003. 304 pp.29.99, $47.95

A u t i sm : M i n d an d Br a i nedited by Uta Frith and Elisabeth HillOxford University Press: 2003. 298 pp.70, $110 (hbk); 29.95, $49.50 (pbk)

Allan Snyder

We tend to see only the whole it takesinsights from abnormal minds to appreciatehow the brain assembles the parts. So couldstudies of autism reveal insights into creativi-

ty? It seems unlikely. The classical portrait ofautism includes low intelligence, significantlearning disabilities, memory by rote, literal-ness and a rigid insistence on sameness. Evenautistic savants, known for their extraordi-nary mental feats, are not creative. Rather,they adopt a form of mimicry, probablydue to privileged access to non-consciousprocesses. Beate Hermelin, an expert onautism, says that no savant will discover anew mathematical theorem, initiate a novelstylistic movement, or render a revealinginterpretation of a Beethoven piano sonata.

But as these two superb new books

demonstrate, our view of autism is radicallytransforming. It now embraces the classicalpicture of severe mental impairment at oneend of the spectrum and possibly Nobel-prizewinning creative genius at the other.Both extremes have in common certain coreautistic features,such as preoccupation withdetail,obsessional interests and difficulties inunderstanding another persons perspective.

Did autism help shape the thinking of Indian

mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan?

SPL

2004 NaturePublishingGroup

autistic mind is literal and sees more of theparts than the whole. An impairment in the

process of concept formation denies intui-tion, but allows access to details that arenormally non-conscious. Consequently, theautistic mind must build logically from theparts to what is intuitive to a normal mind.

The autistic mind seems to be suited toworking algorithmically within a closed sys-tem of specified rules. In contrast, the nor-mal mind can make unexpected connectionsbetween seemingly disparate systems often by breaking the rules of each whentaken in isolation,but not as an ensemble. Inother words, a normal mind invents entirenew systems rather than finding novelty

within a previously prescribed space. Is it

possible to have the best of both worlds?Could certain psychopathologies inadver-tently plunge someone into a temporarystate ofautism,allowing them to see the partsnormally denied to conscious awareness?

To gain deeper perspective on such issuesrequires information from diverse research.The second book under review, edited byUta Frith and Elisabeth Hill, gives a valuableupdate in 13 insightful chapters, written byauthorities on the subject. I especiallyenjoyed the editors two chapters and thoseby the groups of Baron-Cohen, Happ andSchultz.Although tilted to the specialist, thisexcellent book portrays a panoramic view ofautism. It is loaded with all kinds of goodies:autism is no longer a rare disease; it can beassociated with congenital blindness;peoplewith autism have difficulty recognizingfaces; they show a strong desire to system-atize; and on average their brains are largerand heavier than normal brains from aroundthe age of 24 years (but probably not asadults). Movement disturbances may playa role in autism a reduction in facialexpressions may reflect problems with theunderlying social brain network.

We are told that there is still no unifyingtheory of autism.But I suggest that a failure inthe process ofconcept formation and its asso-ciated top-down inhibition of the parts thatmake up the whole may offer a mechanismthat could unite the current descriptive theor-ies. Concepts order the world internally.Without them,order must be imposed exter-nally,hence the setting up ofrigid routines. Allan Snyder is director of the Centre for the Mind, ajoint venture of the Australian National University,

Canberra, ACT 0200, and the University of

Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia.

Reproduced from Nature, April 2004