Talk:Kim Peek

Kim Peek was not autistic. He lacked a corpus callousum and it gave him an extraordinary memory. He did not have trouble socializing or communicating. This is a cliche that needs to stop. I'm an autistic person and saying Kim Peek was autistic is harmful to autistic people. 172.90.119.154 21:55, October 13, 2015 (UTC)

You are clearly a person who doesn't accept the breadth of the Autistic Spectrum. That makes you harmful to Autistic people and the understanding of the condition as a whole. It's 2015, not 1965. TLPG 09:40, October 14, 2015 (UTC)

Not autistic
Kim Peek was not autistic. Although he was a savant and was diagnosed with it, he actually had FG syndrome.

Mozart999 (talk) Wolfie  20:14, August 19, 2020 (UTC)
 * That is speculation post his passing by people trying to undiagnose him. Peek was Autistic. Do not change anything, please. TLPG 00:01, August 20, 2020 (UTC)

There seems to be some debate over whether or not he was. Although only around 10% of autistic people are savants, only half of savants are autistic.

FG syndrome is an extremely rare syndrome, and many children with FG get misdiagnosed with autism.

Mozart999 (talk) Wolfie  01:13, August 20, 2020 (UTC)
 * Peek didn't have FG Syndrome. That's the speculation TLPG was talking. It's hate speech and it's wrong. He was never diagnosed with FGS. HKPH (talk) 03:21, August 20, 2020 (UTC)

I didn't say he was diagnosed with it. It is now thought that he actually had it instead of autism, and that he was misdiagnosed. But again, either way I don't think we will really know for sure. I promise not to edit the page, and I wasn't even thinking of doing so in the first place.

And also how is that hate speech? Mozart999 (talk) Wolfie  05:31, August 20, 2020 (UTC)
 * It's hate speech because it's an attempt to undiagnose an Autistic with a positive reputation. I know for sure that Kim wasn't FGS. He wasn't intellectually disabled - that's impossible for savants and yet that is a key criteria for FGS. Twinkles86 (talk) 05:44, August 20, 2020 (UTC)

Can you give me solid proof that he didn't have FGS? Then I will stop talking on this page.

Mozart999 (talk) Wolfie  17:56, August 20, 2020 (UTC)
 * Twinkles already did. Savants can not be intellectually disabled. An FGS diagnosis requires the person to be intellectually disabled. Kim was a savant, therefore he was not intellectually disabled. That precludes an FGS diagnosis. Do not ask to prove a negative ("prove that something isn't/wasn't") because that is a fallacy. You need to prove beyond doubt that he did and you can't. People thinking he did is not enough. That is the end of this conversation and I'm locking this talk page to make sure of it. TLPG 23:05, August 20, 2020 (UTC)