David Pino Enfield CT is an expert school psychologist providing his thoughts about education, Enfield, and life.
Facilitated communication has been thoroughly debunked, several times, in several ways. So the question is whether it was the technique used in the "writing" of the book. To justify it by suggesting it has "provided hope and understanding" is to ignore the falsity of the method, and is as much as saying that it's okay to lie if it makes people feel good. I haven't been able to determine whether the book was produced by facilitated communication, but it seems very possible. If so, then, deliberately fraudulent or, as in the case of many "facilitators" innocently self-decieved, any "understanding" is really none at all. It's really important to know, I think. Part way into the book, I found myself wondering, and am now very skeptical until shown otherwise. Sad, really.
Facilitated communication has been thoroughly debunked, several times, in several ways. So the question is whether it was the technique used in the "writing" of the book. To justify it by suggesting it has "provided hope and understanding" is to ignore the falsity of the method, and is as much as saying that it's okay to lie if it makes people feel good. I haven't been able to determine whether the book was produced by facilitated communication, but it seems very possible. If so, then, deliberately fraudulent or, as in the case of many "facilitators" innocently self-decieved, any "understanding" is really none at all. It's really important to know, I think. Part way into the book, I found myself wondering, and am now very skeptical until shown otherwise. Sad, really.
ReplyDelete