Talk:Rapid prompting method: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 22:16, 20 September 2019

Latest revision as of 10:59, 24 February 2024

(7 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{WikiProject Skepticismbanner shell|class=C|importance1=Low}}

{{WikiProject Autism|class=C|importance=MediumPsychology}}

{{WikiProject Skepticism|importance=Low}}

{{WikiProject Autism|importance=Mid}}

}}

== RPM as its own page instead of redirect to FC ==

Line 23 ⟶ 27:

[[User:Chrisglasater|Chrisglasater]] ([[User talk:Chrisglasater|talk]]) 13:44, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

:Please back up --[[User:Wikiman2718|Wikiman2718]] ([[User talk:Wikiman2718|talk]]) 14:10, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

:Are you aware of any cases where the autistic person can type correct answers on a qwerty keyboard without any prompting? [[User:MainePatriot|MainePatriot]] ([[User talk:MainePatriot|talk]]) 23:38, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

::How should a person who needs prompting to initiate many purposeful actions in their daily life use a qwerty keyboard completely without any prompting? [[User:Kjdlr|Kjdlr]] ([[User talk:Kjdlr|talk]]) 09:56, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

==Personal Observations==

Line 37 ⟶ 43:

::::::A methodological or theoretical critique such as this does not yield a conclusion one way or another as to whether the technique works. There is an important distinction between practices which have been scientifically demonstrated not to work, e.g., [[acupuncture]], and practices which simply lack scientifically acceptable evidence. The maneuvering or noncompliance of advocates or opponents may raise questions, but it does not raise scientific answers. The best indications available right now are nonscientific testimonials, both for and against. --[[Special:Contributions/73.13.242.253|73.13.242.253]] ([[User talk:73.13.242.253|talk]]) 22:05, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

::::::: You neglect to account for the fact that this technique purports to allow people who can’t speak or sign or even read to write novels. The reviewers were right to call it pseudoscience. In fact, fringe guidelines allow any clearly impossible claim to be labeled as pseudoscience even in the absence of scientific research. —[[User:Wikiman2718|Wikiman2718]] ([[User talk:Wikiman2718|talk]]) 22:16, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

::::::::There is nothing inherently impossible in the idea that a person whose sensorimotor difficulties prevent speech or sophisticated signing may still cognitively understand spelling, and may muster the control to thrust a finger at a chosen letter. It's puzzling to me that this would be dismissed as an impossibility. --[[Special:Contributions/73.13.242.253|73.13.242.253]] ([[User talk:73.13.242.253|talk]]) 22:36, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

::::::::: The problem is not motor control. The problem is lack of ability to acquire language. Also, never having been taught how to read or write. --[[User:Wikiman2718|Wikiman2718]] ([[User talk:Wikiman2718|talk]]) 22:43, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

The problem is that we are just supposed to "assume competence" with no evidence. [[User:Sgerbic|Sgerbic]] ([[User talk:Sgerbic|talk]]) 02:27, 21 September 2019 (UTC)