Interesting. This is just the opinion of a dumb layman
who just reads too much Science news and Discover, but
that's the problem of putting everybody in little
boxes with labels on them, we're not talking about a
few quantum states, but a broad continuum. Who knows
but if my friend was diagnosed today, they might call
it something else. I wonder if when techniques like F
m r i ever become common place as a diagnostic tool,
they might not have to abandon these discrete
definitions for a more individually based system. The
name of an individual's mental or learning disability
might be 2 pages long, lol. Guess I'm waxing science
fictional here, but hey! sci fi predicted cloning
right? You mentioned verbal versus visual, intuition
tells me that I mightn't be too far off the mark when
I compare it to the fact that blind people use their
visual centers in reading braille, and, I recently
read, in memory too. Kind of blurs the lines, our
brains must have more tricks up their sleeves, lol.
Just musing, off-topic no less.
--- [log in to unmask] wrote:
> That's true about a person with a central auditory
> deficit.  Now there are
> people claiming that dyslexia can be verbal rather
> than giving it another name
> but its original definition was strictly visual in
> nature.  However, with
> dysnomia or anomia reversals are not a problem.
> Dyslexia today is understood to
> potentially involve the auditory system but the big
> problem with this theory is
> that most dyslexics can speak with minimal to no
> problem.  Then again, there are
> very definitely braille dyslexics so who knows <g>.
>
> Tom
>
>
> Tom Brennan  KD5VIJ, CCC-A/SLP
> web page
http://titan.sfasu.edu/~g_brennantg/sonicpage.html





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover