ABA is Backed by Scientism, Not Science

Scientism, ABA, and the pathologization of autism

The Simpsons created by Matt Groening — (image created by author on Canva)

Neuronormative ideology

Those who have been following my research might remember I have developed three defining features of neuronormative ideology, based on Sonja K. Foss’ model of ideological criticism. The characteristics of neuronormative ideology are:

1. suggestions that neurodivergent ways of being and doing are unacceptable, negative, or undesirable;

2. the pathologization of neurodivergent traits merely because they’re different, and not because they are inherently problematic;

3. assuming superiority of neurotypical traits and behaviour over neurodivergent traits and behaviour; and

4. giving authority to neurotypical views while disregarding neurodivergent experiences.

I will discuss scientism and the second principle of pathologization here. This article is part of a series. If you missed the most recent piece, Differences Are Not Deficits, I recommend reading that one first.

---

Scientism and pathologization

In 2012 Susan Haack, a professor of philosophy, developed what she called the six signs of scientism.

The first two are the most relevant to my current inquiry, and they are: (1) using the words “science,” “scientific,” “scientifically,” “scientist,” etc., honorifically, as generic terms of epistemic praise; and (2) adopting the manners, the trappings, the technical terminology, etc., of the sciences, irrespective of their real usefulness.

“Statistics in social-scientific work focus attention on variables that can be measured at the expense of those that really matter.” — Susan Haack

To the list of honorifics, I would add the terms “evidence-based”, “science-based”, “research”, “studies”, “data” and “best practice”. As Haack notes, “practitioners uneasy about the standing of their discipline or approach” tend to use these honorifics “emphatically and often”, and their use “encourages uncritical credulity”. The repeated use of these honorifics in behaviour industry marketing presents ABA techniques as “scientifically valid” and therefore beyond reproach, refusing to acknowledge the many compelling criticisms of behaviour therapies.