That’s a neurological condition, not a symptom, or am I being needlessly autistic about exact semantics?
Edit: this was supposed to be a joke. If “being autistic” isn’t a symptom but a condition, the front and back halves of that sentence are contradictory. But since the second only applies if the first doesn’t, the contradiction is self-referentially resolved.
I was trying to make a joke of my own, juxtaposing my own use of “being autistic” with the prior assertion that “autistic” isn’t a symptom. I suppose it didn’t land. Sorry about that.
That’s a neurological condition, not a symptom, or am I being needlessly autistic about exact semantics?
Edit: this was supposed to be a joke. If “being autistic” isn’t a symptom but a condition, the front and back halves of that sentence are contradictory. But since the second only applies if the first doesn’t, the contradiction is self-referentially resolved.
good argument. unfortunately i don’t care
I was trying to make a joke of my own, juxtaposing my own use of “being autistic” with the prior assertion that “autistic” isn’t a symptom. I suppose it didn’t land. Sorry about that.
Oh :(