Hard talk: Does autism need philosophy?
See autism as a different brain style, not a broken one, and your goals, language, and rapport will improve.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Bölte et al. (2019) wrote a short, sharp editorial.
They asked if autism needs philosophy.
They argued yes—philosophy can flip the script from deficit to difference.
What they found
The paper does not test people.
It tests ideas.
It says calling autism a disorder fuels stigma.
Calling it a neurotype fuels respect and better science.
How this fits with other research
Rana et al. (2024) extends the idea.
They add evolutionary psychiatry data to back the neurodiversity claim.
Graber et al. (2023) is the next step.
They map how ABA goals must shift from making kids act neurotypical to supporting autistic self-determination.
Mathur et al. (2026) turns the talk into action.
They urge BCBAs to sit with autistic critiques and evolve practice with humility.
Jackson et al. (2025) shows the frame in real life.
Their inpatient study used a strengths-based, neurodiversity-framed autism assessment and adults loved it.
Why it matters
You can start today.
Drop deficit language in reports.
Ask clients what success looks like to them.
Use their answers to set goals.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Replace one deficit phrase in your next report with a strength-based description.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
When we think about autism as a phenomenon, and how it is perceived by autistic and neurotypical individuals as well as the society as a whole, it appears obvious that philosophical issues are in the room. In fact, the history of autism is rich in discussions and controversies on how to best understand and conceptualize autistic behaviors and experiences. Now that the voices of people on the spectrum are being expressed and heard more, a novel and more balanced picture of autism is taking form and increasingly accepted. This picture is largely influenced by notions such as neurodiversity, and stresses functional and quality of life outcomes rather than symptomatology (Bölte et al., 2018; Jonsson et al., 2017). For autistic people and their relatives, the way autism is perceived determines the stigma associated with the diagnosis. For researchers and clinicians, autism operationalization guides paradigms for studying, assessing, and intervening. Although I (S.B.) have been in the field of autism for more than 20 years now, my impression is that philosophy and philosophers have rarely been explicitly visible in autism theory, science, clinical practice, or opinion building. Therefore, I was thrilled when Kenneth A. Richman (K.A.R.), Professor of Philosophy and Health Care Ethics, approached me for a fruitful exchange of perspectives, and an introduction to the philosophy of autism. In this editorial, we share some of our discussions, characterized by a clinical autism researcher’s asking a range of naïve to challenging and provocative questions to a philosopher. We hope that this interview helps the reader of AUTISM form a better sense of the significance and scope of the philosophy of autism.
Autism : the international journal of research and practice, 2019 · doi:10.1177/1362361318808181