In defense of the double empathy problem hypothesis
An urgently needed alternative to fallacies and injustices in mainstream autism research
C.J.M. Bollen (Eindhoven University of Technology)
J.B. van Grunsven (TU Delft - Ethics & Philosophy of Technology)
More Info
expand_more
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.
Abstract
In their theoretical note, “The Double Empathy Problem: A Derivation Chain Analysis and Cautionary Note,” Livingston et al. (2024) took a critical look at the double empathy problem hypothesis (DEPH). While they acknowledge that the DEPH offers promising insights, and while their critical note seems, at times, to be written with an eye to furthering and expanding DEPH, the main point they ultimately drive home is that DEPH has a “precarious theoretical and evidence base” and that, given this (allegedly) shaky foundation, applying DEPH “into real-world applications may have unintended and potentially harmful consequences for autistic people and those with similar conditions” (Livingston et al., 2024, p. 10). In this theoretical note, we take a critical look at Livingston et al.’s critique of DEPH, arguing that their warning note is problematic both from an ethical and philosophy of science point of view.
Files
File under embargo until 20-04-2026