The realness of what we feel
When looking through recent autism research, I found this very interesting and useful article
It says that research into the sensory aspects of autism has been hamstrung by a basic ambiguity in terminology. Research has used "sensory sensitivity" interchangeably to refer to multiple different things:
how stimuli feel to the person
activity in the brain caused by the stimuli
Many research articles on autistic sensory issues use the word reactivity to describe sensory sensitivities. "Reactivity" refers to behavior, how an autistic person outwardly responds to sensory stimuli.
Applied Behavior Analysis (or ABA), the main "therapy" used to "treat" autistic children, originates from behaviorism, a school of thought in psychology which holds that thoughts, feelings, and internal experiences can't be objectively measured, therefore studying them is not science. Only behavior can be studied scientifically.
As a therapeutic practice, ABA works by using operant conditioning techniques on autistic people to increase "desired" behaviors and decrease "undesired" behaviors. Change in behaviors being exhibited= treatment. That's behaviorism.
I am conscious of a certain horror in behaviorism. Imagine that someone is screaming in pain. The pain is an internal, subjective experience; the screaming is a behavior.
Now, look again at my three bullet-points describing the terminology problem in autism research. "How stimuli feel" is the pain. "How the person reacts" is the screaming. Researchers have been using the same words to refer to both pain and screaming.
This potentially can cause multiple types of erroneous assumptions:
By stopping the screaming, you are stopping the pain.
If someone is not screaming, they are not in pain.
The screaming is the problem. There is no such thing as pain.
In my (autistic) opinion, autism is fundamentally a disability or difference of internal experience. Autism research has an enduring problem with the concept of internal experience. Autism is described as a collection of "wrong" behaviors, which I guess is useful enough for identifying autistic people, maybe, but it contains no insight. I believe that autistic behaviors are linked to autistic experiences.
I also believe that non-autistic behaviors are linked to non-autistic experiences. I cannot experience what it is like to be non-autistic, but I can observe non-autistic people being relatively unresponsive to stimuli and the world around them, and withstanding overwhelming environments without severe consequences. I observe their genuine, non-malicious confusion at my daily pain, exhaustion, fear, and stress, and at my needs and behaviors. I think that non-autistic behavior makes sense within the experience of being non-autistic.
I think the key characteristic of my Autism could be described as "intensity of experience." Feelings, sensations, stimuli, thoughts, and knowledge are much more vivid, enduring, and demanding of my attention than for most other people. The behaviors others see result from this.