Autismbook

Creativity at A
u
the Crossroads t
i
of Life and Death s
m
Antonio
Cassella and
L
o
g
o
s
( )
Creativity at the Crossroads of Life and Death ISBN 0-9721705-7-X
About Logos (Λ) Autism and Logos
Here is a familiar scenario: A little girl, while lying in bed, sings sweetly to her doll. The song she sings is the very song that her mother
has sung to her the night before. Thus, while singing, the girl is pretending that she is the doll’s mother and that her doll is herself.
To an autistic person witnessing this precious scene, the little girl is just there, lying in one place, and being herself,
that is, one person only; for the creative witness, however, the singing girl is both here and there (a child in the present and a
mother in the future), lies in separate worlds at the same time (in her world and that of an adult), and is herself and her mother
simultaneously. Through this kind of pretend play, the girl’s artistic side (parallel or multiple ways of thinking) nurtures her autistic side
(sequential or linear thinking). Through her practice of nurturing her doll, then, over time she will grow into a real mother, the kind of
person who can help others grow.
The above scenario is a good representation of a cognitive model I call Logos. The Logos model (Λ) presents the creative
intelligence of human beings and nature as a complementarity between two cognitive dynamics; one of these dynamics is called
sequence (or finiteness) and the other simultaneity (or infinity). Sequence allows us to recognize repetitive patterns,
legitimate interpretations of reality, and the literal meaning of any message. Simultaneity, by violating the apparent reality of
sequence, helps us “re-cognize” new patterns in any situation, apprehend humor, and discern the metaphors behind literal
interpretations of texts.
Each of these two dynamics contains a set of eight laws.
• Within the dynamic called sequence—which remains unimpaired among autistic individuals—the first law states that no object,
expression, manifestation, event, and so on, can exist in separate worlds at the same time.
• Within simultaneity—which is inoperative in autistics—the first rule states that everything can “lie” (meaning to stay and to tell
a lie) in separate worlds at the same time.
On the surface, sequence and simultaneity appear to be contradictory. But in fact, as Λ shows, creativity is born from the
integration of any literal object, event, or interpretation with its opposite—for instance, the concept of here with there (as used in
pretend play), 0 with 1 (in a quantum computer), I with you (in the proper use of pronouns), and so on.
Those familiar with autism know that autistics tend to reverse their pronouns. This phenomenon occurs because autistics’ mental
processes follow the linear causality and legitimacy of tangible operations; for instance, my autistic son—who calls himself “you,” in line
with what I call him—can neither think of calling himself “I, ”the way I refer to myself, nor pretend to be me in imaginative play. In his
view it is impossible for him to be himself and me or lie here and there at the same time. In short, my son can
conceive of linear operations and persons with unique names; but cannot think of simultaneous ones, by which every person on Earth
may call himself or herself “I.” “I” dwells in me, in the person I love, and in the person I hate—everywhere and, thus, nowhere. Similarly,
my son cannot tell a lie, for when we lie we look simultaneously at both the truth and its nemesis, untruth—a feat that is akin to
dwelling in opposite worlds at the same time.
These new ways of thinking may be a challenge to some. If sequence-driven folks find my notions disturbing, all they need to do
is remember that when we tell a lie and succeed in deceiving others, we have engaged our capacity for simultaneity; in the same way,
when we doubt, hope, love, and soar into the world of fantasy, we exist in parallel or simultaneous worlds before landing in a single
and linear reality refreshed by our creative capacities. Historically, our capacity for simultaneity is what led to the creation of both the
violin and the bow and arrow—nonlogical instruments, which rely on the tension created by the simultaneous engagement of opposite
end points.
Simultaneity is a double-edged sword: if we use it to co-create the world with others, it may refresh our world and grace us with
life; and if we use it recklessly, it will lead us to insanity or death. In connecting with our inherent capacity for simultaneity, we can learn
to commune with nature again, as our remote ancestors did. In this regard, autistics are unwittingly serving as our teachers, for in the
process of thoroughly understanding autism we understand our own minds.
The Logos model can help us find new ways of helping autistic individuals. It can also give us insights into the power to create,
which exists in nature and by extension in ourselves. With the use of Logos, we can change current educational methods and do the
very important work of promoting a creative and cooperative mindset in our children, friends, and coworkers. More importantly, through
Λ we will learn that to stay in control is to share control and that the only power that makes sense is the power to control our
own power, as opposed to controlling other people, our environment, and so on.
My book Creativity at the Crossroads of Life and Death links Logos with science; The Dance of Order and Chaos applies the
model to the “re-cognition” of global challenges; and in The Flameless Fire I revisit human development, language, and the arts. To
learn more about Λ, visit http://www.logosresearch.net.
© 2004 by Logosresearch
CREATIVITY AT THE CROSSROADS
OF LIFE AND DEATH
Creativity at the Crossroads of Life and Death
BY THE SAME AUTHOR
El Desarrollo de la Inteligencia Social: Aportes del Autismo
The Flameless Fire: From Autism to Creative Intelligence
Autism and Creative Intelligence:

Theory of Mind and Logos (Λ)
The Dance of Order and Chaos:

Drifts to Apocalypse
Antonio Cassella
Creativity at
the Crossroads
of Life and Death
Autism and Logos (Λ)
Published and printed in the United States by Logosresearch, Quincy, Massachusetts
ISBN 0-9721705-7-X
Copyright © 2004 by Logosresearch

First edition published December 2002
Second edition published March 2004
This book is sold and distributed subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or profit, be
lent, resold, hired out, or circulated without the prior consent of Logosresearch in writing.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, transmitted, or utilized in any form or
by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by any information
storage and retrieval system, for purposes of trade or profit, without the prior permission in writing of
Logosresearch.
To order this book within the USA and Canada find us on the web at
http://www.logosresearch.net
To my brother Sergio, for his courage to meet God in extreme pain, humility, and poverty
© 2004 by Logosresearch v
The help that this book may offer owes much to sober critique. I thank Dr. Brendan A. Maher for examining my
ideas, pressing me to improve my presentation, and challenging me to do more than my best. I hope I was able to
explain the unexplainable and that this book on creativity may benefit others.
vi
CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES viii
FOREWORD ix
INTRODUCTION: The Crossroads of Life and Death 1
CHAPTER 1 The World between 1 and 0 8
CHAPTER 2 The Dance of Sequence with Simultaneity 17
CHAPTER 3 Being in Two Places at Once 25
CHAPTER 4 Being in One Place at a Time 30
CHAPTER 5 Going and Coming: The Logos Model (Λ) 36
CHAPTER 6 From Walking to Crawling 44
CHAPTER 7 The Universe and the Mind 52
CHAPTER 8 The Laws of Simultaneity and Sequence 58
CHAPTER 9 Discourse and Democracy 66
CHAPTER 10 In the Beginning Was the Logos 72
EPILOGUE “To Be and Not to Be” 77
REFERENCES 83
© 2004 by Logosresearch vii

LIST OF FIGURES
1. The Complementarity Between Sequence and Simultaneity 13
2. A Sketch of the Logos Model (Λ) of Creative Intelligence 37
3. A Sketch of the Neuro-Circuitry of Creative Intelligence 50
© 2004 by Logosresearch viii

FOREWORD
*******************************************************************
We can perceive and measure only things that stand in a unique place and at a specific time. For example, when I am cutting
an apple on my plate, I cannot see the apple on my plate and at some other physical location at the same time. The apple can
*
be moved, but until that happens, it is still on my plate. Further, while the apple is there, no other object can occupy its place.
In this book I show that the rational belief that nothing can lie in separate worlds at the same time or
†
share the same space with something else simultaneously drives the pursuit of repetition and aversion to
change that characterize autism and the autistic side of our minds. This belief, which I place at the center of the cognitive
dynamics spared in autism, allows us to recognize patterns again and again. I call it sequence or finiteness.
Autistics appear to be perfectly correct: we cannot cross the barrier of time, pass through solid objects, or walk on water.
To do so, would require us to be ourselves and something else at the same time. Only ghosts can do that, which is why my
autistic son is perplexed when I tell him about Harry Potter, a fictional student of magic who flies on a broomstick, becomes
invisible at will, moves faster than light, goes through brick walls as if he were a phantom, and talks to phantoms (Rowling,
1997). My son and most autistics cannot think of such unreal feats of the imagination. So, why is it that he cannot fathom the
spirit behind Halloween and the harmony behind violations of apparent reality?
‡
I posit that, unlike autistics, our minds possess a wraithlike side that is able to “lie” in separate worlds at once or
accommodate separate worlds in the same space at the same time. This cognitive dynamics allows us to “re-cognize”
patterns for the first time. I call it simultaneity, infinity, or less-than-perfect control.
Autistics’ failure to think of simultaneity renders them incapable of grasping change, humor, and fantasy. For example,
suppose that Queen Cleopatra often said “No!” to her subjects and put to death any person who reminded her of her habit of
denying favors. Suppose also that a jester in her court bet a fortune and his life that he would tell the queen about her quick
temper and be praised for it. True to the letter of his decision and under the close scrutiny of the stakeholders who were totally
confident that they would win, he approached the queen while she was walking by the banks of the Nile. Pointing to the lotus
flowers all around her, he said, “The most gracious among the flowers, her Majesty is indeed the Queen of deNial.”
The jester’s bettors lost because they solely engaged the autistic side of their minds, one that values logic, reality, and the
repetition of the known. By contrast, the courtier succeeded by leaning on the creative side of his mind: one in love with
ambiguity, fantasy, and the renovation of the known. More to the point, he succeeded because he “saw” that separate
worlds—“denial” and “the Nile”—shared the same space at the same time in the person of Cleopatra, and that the queen
stood in both at once.
‡‡
I call Logos —abbreviated with the symbol Λ—the paradoxical play of the two sides of our minds. These two sides are
our autistic core, which is anchored in sequence or finiteness, and our artistic gift for simultaneity or infinity, which is
impaired in different ways and to varying degrees among autistics. We need both! Autistic conservation and artistic renovation
may seem opposites but in fact are complementary. Without renovation, our ability to conserve patterns dries up; and without
a pattern to start and to end with, renovation is meaningless.
This book, which sets forth my views on the magical laws that rule creative intelligence, is not easy to reed. However, if
you, dear reader, have the nerve to tell your sweetheart that your evening will end in a tragedy and then, when the time
comes, present him or her with two tickets for Hamlet, then you should have no problem in learning about the magic hiding in
the human mind.
*
This example is part of a critique offered by Dr. B. A. Maher.
†
Words in cursive, or red for higher emphasis, highlight the cognitive system that is spared in autism.
‡
Words in bold, or blue for more emphasis, point to the weird aspect of creative intelligence that autistics cannot fathom.
‡‡
Words in green point to the play of the two sides of the human mind.
© 2004 by Logosresearch ix
© 2004 by Logosresearch x
INTRODUCTION Creativity at the Crossroads of Life and Death

*******************************************************************
‡
Autism is characterized by a preference for the lines of the text, my creative or artistic side
sameness and repetition and by an aversion to would read the metaphorical meanings hidden
change. People with this disability invariably accept behind the lines, bringing to light a novelty that
reality at face value and interpret what they perceive perhaps not even the author had thought of.
*
in a customary, stereotypical, or rigid way. In 1824 Jean-François Champollion, intrigued by
the mystery behind the hieroglyphs used in an
At certain times, normal human beings also tend inscription about Cleopatra, deciphered them
to exhibit behavior related to autism. For instance, successfully, offering us the possibility of learning
we follow our autistic side when we recognize our the ways of ancient Egyptians. However, if we were
image in a mirror, use known words and patterns, or to read a translated papyrus—for instance, one
predict the time of arrival of our plane. Ramses II dictated to a scribe thirty-three centuries
However, we also quake in our boots whenever ago—we would realize that no translation would be
we fly in a vehicle that is heavier than air. For accurate enough to reflect precisely what he wrote.
example, if the jet turbines suddenly were to fail, we And even if we were somehow assured that we were
would become conscious of the fact that our plane reading what the pharaoh wrote, we might disagree
†
might not arrive. We use the word “might” when, with his views.
with the flexible side of our minds (the side that By disagreeing, we would pay attention
autistics seem unaware of), we understand that the simultaneously to two clashing interpretations of the
similarity, repetition, and predictability that the rigid text preserved on the papyrus: his and ours.
side cherishes will not remain unchanged forever. At
that point, we might remember that all we know The magic here does not consist of seeing the
began as an alien concept. world only as he saw it, thus leaving our identity
behind; that would be courting madness. Nor would
For example, if I looked at a book written in we see his world only in our terms, in the manner of
Chinese, although I would see its words, they would autistics. The magic, or the kind of empathy that
hold no meaning for either facet of my mind. And autistics and those with rigid minds do not possess,
yet, the seemingly impenetrable text might arouse is being able to see his world and the topic he wrote
my curiosity and challenge me to learn the language about with our eyes and with “his” eyes
of the author. After learning Chinese, while my rigid simultaneously.
or autistic side would read the literal meaning of At this point, the absurd principle underlying the
cognitive deficit that impairs autistics knocks at our
door.
‡
* In this book, the word text points to the expression of anything
Recall that words in cursive or red point to the cognitive
we may perceive or conceive of. For example, the word dragon
system that is spared in autism. is a text. The image of a dragon in a movie, the image of a
†
Recall that words in bold or blue point to the side of the mind dragon stored in the mind, a toy dragon, and a book about a
impaired in autism. dragon are also texts. Dragons may be unreal, but expressions
about them are real.
© 2004 by Logosresearch 1
To us, “being” another person and “being” in a

different place and time respond to a make-believe By standing on the papyrus as if it were a
mental movement. To autistics, mental movements bridge, albeit in fantasy, the empathic writer and the
are as real as physical movements! Their conception empathic reader of a text each belong to two
is as clear as their perception. Thus, when I tell my different histories or sequences at the same time. At
son to feel what I feel by “taking my place,” he that juncture, we might say that each is equal to
physically moves to my place, pushing me aside. To and different from his or her interlocutor
him, being in my place with his mind while his body simultaneously.
remains elsewhere is equivalent to being and not
being simultaneously or to being in two places at The magic of paying attention to our view and to
the same time. To him that concept is absurd, the competing view of another person
impossible, and—in any case—illegitimate. The side simultaneously—when we doubt, for example—
of the mind that is spared in him must always reject introduces tension. The tension may be resolved in
violations of reality; otherwise, conservation would several ways, some destructive and some others
be meaningless. constructive. In the destructive scenario, one party
Back to the papyrus. Creative empathy invites may obliterate the other, or both parties may
us to violate reality in two ways: We must “be” two obliterate each other—not an uncommon outcome.
persons at the same time (ourselves and Ramses Regarding the constructive scenario, if, after an
II), and we must “exist” both now and in the Egypt of agonizing clash, each party wishes the best for the
thirty-three centuries ago. Furthermore, we may also other, both will arrive at novel ideas and at a re-
imagine that while the pharaoh wrote, he “existed” in constructed reality. That is, the self and the other will
two contexts simultaneously: his own and the world grow by co-creating their world(s). The tension
of a reader far in the future. Thus, by the magic of a created by seemingly irreconcilable interpretations of
text expressed through a papyrus, Ramses II is the same phenomenon is not always agonizing;
there and here as we are here and there at the sometimes it can be very funny.
same time. To be sure, there is no way to have fun on one
The papyrus, which was then and there, is here hand or to suffer on the other when opinions over an
and now; and that is fine! That happens to anything issue are too similar. Thus, when we face a worthy,
that moves in space and time. And yet, by virtue of albeit ruthless, opponent—one that mulls over our
our imaginative reading, the papyrus is now and strange views for a while instead of pulling the
then and here and there at once. To us, or because trigger—we arrive at a magical crossroads beyond
of us, the papyrus has become an anomaly. We may space and time. In a fork—a metaphor for
compare it to a bridge, crossroads, or fork that ambiguity—two or more different interpretations of
stands in two mismatched worlds simultaneously, the same text engage in a conflict which, as I said,
since the point of intersection belongs to both may be sublimated into a new reality or sheer fun.
realms. In visible reality, however, there is no way
we can see or stand on the point of intersection of Before choice forces us to land in a definite spot,
two separate worlds. we may find ourselves in a paradoxical situation: At
the confluence of mutually exclusive paths, we hold
to two equally gripping explanations of reality. At that
instant, which “lies” (to remain and to tell a lie) But sequence, finiteness, or perfection—the
beyond space and time, we “exist”—perhaps direct dynamics that moves autistics and the autistic
metaphorically—in separate worlds at once. And side of the mind with a view to guarding permanence
yet we remain blissfully unaware of the magic that and predictability—is equally important.
our creative side has performed, for our autistic side Without the limits that the autistic side of the
forces us to believe that identity and existence can brain imposes, freedom leads to madness; and
be had only in a specific place, at a specific time, without the freedom that our creative side
and within a known history or specific cause-effect introduces, unchallenged limits bring stagnation.
sequence.
Our identity, then, grows thanks to the
The truth of the matter is that our identities grow complementarity between autistic sequence (by
only when we simultaneously “live” in our world and which we exist in one place at a time) and creative
in the world of an enemy seen as a potential friend. simultaneity (by which we “exist” in separate,
Creation and growth occur when reciprocal enmity mismatched, and even incompatible worlds at the
invites the self and the other to cross their views in a same time).
potentially deadly duel, and reciprocal empathy, to
cross or join them in a resurrection. Thus, creativity This seemingly pretentious suggestion would
does not reside solely in operational definitions, remain senseless without an inclusion of what
logic, and analytical methods; it fundamentally rests autism reveals to us. The fact that autistics cannot
on double meaning (as in the text “cross”), the relate to anomaly—the foreground of creativity—
flameless fire that animates tragedy and comedy. provides us with an opportunity to explore the nature
It does not follow from what I have said so far of creative thought. This book presents my view of
that we create only when meeting, with curiosity, the the paradoxical laws that guide ingenuity in the
clashing points of view of other people. In fact, the human mind and in nature as shown by autistics’
most dangerous and promising other we must failure and success in key cognitive tests.
contend with lives in our selves. Hoping for
resurrection, the creative person boldly greets doubt Because they cannot suspend the validity of
by embracing contradictory aspects of his or her what they know and thus come up with new ideas,
mind. autistics tell us, by default, that there is more to
creative existence than taking at face value
Paradoxically, any system—an individual, a functional happenings, logic, or quantitative
family, a country, or the entire world—grows, by both schemes.
changing and conserving its identity. The creator of
growth is the flexible or inverse dynamics impaired in On this point, mathematics and natural science,
autism, which I call simultaneity, infinity, or less- although necessary in many endeavors, are not very
*
than-perfection. helpful in demystifying the beauty that animates
works of art or their own beauty. We are as
incapable of harmonizing different aspects of the
*
In this work, I use the words “simultaneity,” “infinity,” and “less- same science (for example, linking general relativity
than-perfection” interchangeably to denote the principle at the to quantum physics) as harmonizing different
root of the creative side of the mind, which is impaired in autism.
denominations of the same religion. Worse, we We are moved by the intelligence that allowed
proved to ourselves that we can make a science out our “primitive” ancestors to become hunters,
of insanity (for example, by massively funding warriors, storytellers, sorcerers, philosophers,
research on extremely destructive weapons) and a scientists, politicians, liars, and jokers
virtue out of the stupidity of interpreting sacred texts simultaneously.
literally (the case of fundamentalists in any creed).
And yet, we could avoid stupidity and insanity by As recently as two hundred years ago, in the
reconciling scientific discoveries and technology with Wild West, the same person could be sheriff, judge,
the arts, philosophy, religion, and myth. mayor, bartender, and caretaker. Nowadays, no one
In 1935, Walt Disney’s Snow White, for can gather together the pieces of a fast-changing
example, pioneered animation in movies that world that has become too complex; yet I dream that
combined art, social values, and technology. Soon if we understood the nature of the creative
after, Fantasia—an allusion to the fantasy that intelligence residing in our minds and in nature, we
autistics fail to spot—emphasized the beauty of would reintegrate our world before we cause its
reintegrating the many facets of the human spirit. disintegration.
For that to happen on a regular basis, however,
educational practices need to undergo a profound Autistics’ inability to create may help us explore
*
change. If we continue furthering the atomization of nature’s nature or the mystery that “lies” in the play
knowledge with a view to overexploiting the limited of sequence (within space and time) and
natural resources of our planet, we will be unable to simultaneity (beyond space and time). As a result,
match our ancestors’ inconceivable feat: soaring into we might reach an integrated vision of the world
the intriguing mystery that permeates simultaneity. without interfering with the steady march of cultural
We risk remaining trapped in the prison built by our diversification and biodiversity. We need autistics as
stagnant views; and if boredom or despair compels much as we need capable and knowledgeable
us to enter ambiguous worlds, our lack of balance minds. Autistics show us, albeit by default, that
and sobriety will preclude our return to a renewed creative intelligence, more than helping us acquire
existence. Either overbearing order or maddening unlimited power, may lead to a never-ending
chaos will snuff out our ambition to control the encounter with freedom and mystery.
universe.
Perhaps the road to creativity that I found during
Unlike autistics, however, we can fight the inertia my research on autism will help others unite the truth
of ingrained, yet obsolete beliefs; we can change our we seek through science with the beauty we adore
ways! in art, in the footsteps of Leonardo da Vinci.
I have written this book, then, in the hope that if Furthermore, as Saint Francis and Saint Anthony
we ever enter the crossroads in which creativity in have shown, spiritual growth reaches miraculous
nature and creativity in our minds meet (perhaps we heights when we contemplate the mystical fraternity
already have), instead of mutual destruction, we and that unites all that exists: to create the world with
nature may offer each other the gift of renovation.
*
Recall that words in green reflect the play of the two sides of
the human mind.
others by entering the dangerous crossroads autistics the magic of simultaneity. Finally, this
between their worlds and our worlds. By and large, model may be used to strengthen creativity and
growing is growing together. social values in normal children.
Indeed, all parents need to develop the innate
In a way, growth leans on the metaphorical qualities of empathy, love, patience, and
death that occurs when we place our familiar world compassion in their sons and daughters at a more
between parentheses, and on the resurrection with pliable age—that is, before their children enter
which we may return with a new vision. formal schooling.
Autistics’ misfortune consists of the inability to
“leave behind” the known in order to tackle the Thanks to Logos’s wide reach, I have integrated
unknown. Hence, they cannot create. Thus, if we teachings from natural science, the rules of
succeed in understanding the nature of autism and language, early Greek and post-modern philosophy,
of the creativity that autistics lack, we might help the arts, and mysticism. This book at first may lead
them and ourselves regain direct contact—or a witty to confusion. In the end, however, it may lead the
conversation, for that matter—with nature’s creative skeptical, creative, patient, and lucky reader to a
powers. surprising “con-fusion,” the seemingly impossible
Understanding how and why creativity works integration of disparate fields of knowledge, which is
within nature and in the human mind continues to be one way of throwing some light at the commonality
the dream of scientists, artists, philosophers, and of the universe and the mind.
mystics. The solution seems naïve: by harmonizing Let us take the invention of the airplane as an
dissimilar applications of human intelligence, we example of the crossroads in which the principles of
may come to know what the capacity to create is, in nature meet the principles of social intelligence.
the same way that we get to know the nature of
something when we can see it from different points In a fixed wing of an aircraft the higher elevation
of view. of the leading edge in relation to the trailing edge
Autistic individuals may teach us how to do that. forces the incoming air down while the air pushes
the wing up. We can observe the magical “con-
With the guidance of Giuseppe, my fifteen-year- fluence” of opposites in the wing of a flying plane
old autistic son, I have conducted key experiments under Newton’s third law of motion, according to
on autism and creative intelligence and analyzed which an action causes an equal and opposite
baffling experiments described in the literature of reaction. But there is something else.
neuroscience and psycholinguistics. This research
and the writings of various mystics, artists, and In reality, when its velocity has increased
philosophers have helped me arrive at a model of sufficiently, the plane takes off through due to the
intelligence—a model I call Logos (Λ). dynamics of Newton’s third law and second law
Logos may prove useful to the task of predicting combined. (The second law, which deals with the
which challenges autistics will fail and which they will inertial property establishes that force equals mass
complete successfully. Perhaps my research will times acceleration or F = m x a.)
help identify the presence of autism at an early age Inertia, or the reluctance to change (an
(four months), prevent or cure the illness, and teach autisticlike feature of nature) that an object presents,
is measured by the object’s mass. By coincidence, he is playing Hamlet. At the end of the play, the
mass is also a measure of the gravitational property, actor must return to his familiar identity and world,
because the positive energy used in elevating an just as the pilot of a plane must land. Both roles
object is stored as negative energy in the earth’s involve three actions: taking off by leaving the
gravitational field (Guth, 1997). familiar world behind, soaring in a strange world
in which everything is and is not, and landing back
In sum, falling planes and cars accelerating on in a refreshed “reality.” Autistics are unable to take
a highway obey the same law of motion—although off, and the insane are unable to land. Only creative
we may prefer looking at the ground from a car human beings can conceive of flying in the world of
rather than from a falling plane. In the view of opposites, between autism and madness, in order to
science, however, the only difference is that while both conserve and renovate their worlds.
we need to spend energy to accelerate a car in a
highway, in the case of falling bodies, gravity works I wonder if the play of opposites that inheres in
for free. the arts helped Leonardo envision helicopters and
Planes and cars tell us that we can control the parachutes. In fact, how much did a formal
motion of mass by playing with opposite forces. For knowledge of physics help the inventors of the
example, if you pull the door of a bank when trying airplane?
to exit and I pull it simultaneously when trying to Although they never finished high school,
enter, neither of us will exit or enter. The idea that Orville and Wilbur Wright, who had a bicycle repair
we can control gravity by balancing it with an shop, came upon the idea of marrying a gas engine
opposite force may be equivalent to thinking, to a glider. They built their own wind tunnel to learn
metaphorically speaking, that the airplane is lighter about aerodynamics, their own glider, and their own
than air when taking off, heavier than air when internal combustion engine. On December 17, 1903,
falling, and—necessarily—heavier and not heavier they tossed a coin to see which one of them would
than air when flying, a nonlogical conclusion (located be the first to fly or die. Doubt and hope taught them
between the logical and the illogical, or logical that death is the ultimate challenger, the opponent
and illogical at the same time). that forces us to marry fantasy with sobriety.
Orville Wright boarded the first functional
airplane ever because his hope of succeeding
matched his fear of failure and death. He and his
brother embraced doubt and hope at once, for
without doubt we have no need for hope. The plane
flew as their creative intelligence flew, by the “co-
incidence” of clashing forces in the wings of their
plane and in their minds: failure (nonbeing) crossed
success (being) as death crossed life the moment
they thought of creating the airplane.
Flying in a device heavier than air, then,
constitutes an apparent violation of reality, in the Paradoxically, the idea of anything new, as in
same way that an actor is and is not himself while the invention of the airplane, is born at a crossroads
where opposites play with one another as life plays rejects nonbeing, truth rejects falsity, yes
with death, literally or figuratively. rejects no, and 1 rejects 0.
I propose also that autistics fail in tests in
Simultaneity—taken as the simultaneous which it is necessary to add the magic of the
conjunction and disjunction of opposites—moves flexible side of the mind, where being meets
airplanes and creative minds. nonbeing, truth meets falsity, yes meets no, and
1 meets 0.
The notion of simultaneity points at the
magical meeting of clashing interpretations. Such a nonlogical, seemingly impossible
Being and nonbeing fight each other in the cognition reflects the capacity for embracing the
autistic world of order as opposed to chaos; but infinity residing between opposites, which I equate
when opposite worlds meet within creative with dealing with opposite terms simultaneously.
simultaneity, the impossible becomes improbable, Would computers work better if besides choosing 1
probable, and, finally, necessary. or 0 (sequence), they were allowed to choose both
values at the same time (simultaneity) as
Logos is founded on the evidence that autistics suggested by quantum physics?
cannot deal with the simultaneity that helps us
create novelty at a crossroads in which we are We need both sides of our minds—the autistic
tormented and enthralled by the play of opposites. and the artistic one—in order to grow. However, in
chapter 1 I highlight the freedom inherent in flying
In short, I propose that autistics succeed in through the skies of the world between 1 and 0,
tests in which they use the side of human order and chaos, here and there—and so on—in
intelligence spared in them—where being which we are and are not at the same time.
CHAPTER 1 The World Between 1 and 0

*******************************************************************
The beauty, mystery, and power of the dance of For example, once, while riding on a train, I
certainty with ambiguity can be witnessed in the interrupted my reading because on the opposite side
simplest things, particularly in humor. Autistics of the aisle an old man was laughing to himself. I
cannot fathom humor. Let us see why in the asked him the reason for his mirth. Flushing with
following joke. embarrassment, he told me that at that very
moment, he had understood a joke someone had
A schoolteacher gave an old squaw a ride. told him six months before. Feeling at a loss, and
Pointing to a bottle of fine whiskey she was holding, fearing that the same thing might happen to me,
the schoolteacher told the squaw, “I got if for my even though I was dying to hear the joke, I went
husband.” The squaw gleefully answered, “Good back to my reading without asking him to tell it to
trade!” me.
To the schoolteacher, the word for meant only
“for the benefit of.” To the squaw, it meant only “in I have been unable to figure out why social
exchange for.” But to us, the word for means both at customs dictate that we may weep by ourselves but
the same time; that is, we laugh at the joke because, not laugh by ourselves. For example, if we weep
in a mysterious way, we are able to side with the while lunching alone in a busy restaurant, somebody
squaw and with the teacher at the same time. We might ask whether we need help, but if we laugh
get the joke, then, when we enter a crossroads at because we finally get a joke, other patrons may
which we “exist” in two or more separate recommend that we see a psychiatrist. Creative
contexts at once. simultaneity, however, suggests a subtle way out of
This is an awesome feat, considering the the problem of understanding jokes too late: learning
realistic, adaptive, logical, and autistic view that we to weep openly while laughing inside. This feat
can be in only one place at a time. entails learning to weep and laugh simultaneously in
a world beyond the reality in which we either weep
Autistics cannot get the joke because they either or laugh.
get the schoolteacher’s world or the squaw’s.
Hence, I attribute the cause of autism to the difficulty Simultaneity is at the basis of drama, humor,
of dealing with simultaneity, the capacity for tragedy, novelty, and paradox. Its influence is real;
harmonizing seemingly irreconcilable contexts. yet it remains invisible and unreachable, as if it were
unreal.
Generally we focus our attention on the meaning Because in our minds the concept of
we are most familiar with, which is why we may not simultaneity denotes an instantaneous action, most
get the joke immediately. As it happens, of us would support the proposition that there is no
understanding a joke requires a spontaneous act of such thing in nature (Schwartz and McGuinness,
communion with the universe. The lack of 1979, p. 106). The reason is that electromagnetic
spontaneity in the right place, at the right time, may radiation, the stuff light is made of, is limited to a
lead us to embarrassing situations. maximum speed of 186,000 miles per second.
Hence we cannot throw light on simultaneity, which humor, which agrees with interactions that go by the
is characterized by infinite speed; visible photons infinite speed inherent in the hazy simultaneity
(traveling packets of light) are not fast enough. posited by quantum physics.
Still, within his theory of special relativity,
Einstein did not deny simultaneity but stated that it is In a way, then, quantum physicists, jokers and
relative to the observer. In 1905 he proposed that artists can be found here and there at the same
the phenomenon that is simultaneous for a time. For them, here and there—two mutually
passenger on a train is not so for the bystander on exclusive endpoints in reality—in creative fantasy
the platform (Callender & Edney, 2001, p. 59). become one thing: here and here (Castaneda,
Einstein called this situation relativity of simultaneity. 1987, p. 242).
Although Einstein did not say it openly, he clearly
suggested that the phenomenon in question is and Because autistics cannot get a joke and cannot
is not simultaneous at the same time. According to feel embarrassed about not getting it, autism
Λ, he was right! As absurd as this may seem, provides a unique opportunity to look at the
†
simultaneity relies on the meeting of being and philosopher’s stone: the mysterious principle by
nonbeing. which we may “lie” in different worlds
simultaneously—within fantasy at least—although
Being and nonbeing meet in ambiguous in the reality framed in visible space and
situations. In fact, they meet in light, since we do not irreversible time we can be seen only in one
know if light is made of particles (photons) or waves. place, doing one thing at a time.
Light is mystifying (to the point that the pope
recently included it in the set of mysteries recited in Autism was not discovered until 1943, when L.
*
the rosary). Richard Feynman (1985), the Kanner used the term “infantile autism” to describe
discoverer of quantum electrodynamics (the science the quandary of eleven children who could not be
that studies the dance of light and matter), showed integrated socially, who repeated known words and
that when light behaves in the manner of actions, and who displayed unusual skill in solving
probabilistic waves, the same photon appears to complex mazes. Kanner was particularly impressed
move in separate trajectories, an invisible feat that by the fact that his autistic patients called
falls into the domain of simultaneity. themselves “you” and their interlocutors “I.” One of
the central manifestations of autism is the inversion
In sum, we, and autistics as well, see legitimate of pronouns. In this book, I show that the secret of
events, sets, and processes conserved by sequence the philosopher’s stone—the dance of rigid certainty
in the visible world in which the speed of physical and flexible ambiguity—“lies” behind autistics’
interactions cannot rise above the finite speed of inability to master pronouns.
light, as posited by Einstein’s theory of relativity. In 1944 H. Asperger showed that few autistics
Unlike autistics, however, we also have the possess above-average abilities. Moreover, he
capacity for seeing the invisible world of art and noted their lack of eye contact, their poverty of
gestures and facial expressions, their insistence on
*
The mysteries are joy (birth and growth), pain (suffering and stereotypic and repetitive movements (for example,
death), glory (resurrection), and light (providence, logos, or the hand flapping, jumping, screaming, and lid turning),
dance of certainty and ambiguity).
and their tendency to satisfy their own needs

exclusively, to the detriment of the demands of their My research (Cassella, 1997, 2000, 2002a,
environment. 2002b) demonstrates that normal children use their
In 1989, when my youngest son was diagnosed ambiguous and creative fantasy—within pretend
with autism, the prevalence of the syndrome was 1 play, for example—by perceiving unconsciously that
per 10,000 individuals. Currently, there are reports of anything may “lie” in mismatched worlds at once
an incidence rate of 5 to 20 cases per 10,000 (DSM- (the law of divergence in Λ).
IV-TR, APA, 2000). The number of autistics may In my view, autism results from the inability to
reach 1.5 million in the United States and 5 million in accept and understand the magic of such an absurd
all the developed countries combined. law. In fact, I found that autistics and the autistic side
These large numbers signify that uncovering the of the normal mind perceive that nothing can stay
roots of autism is vital to society’s well-being, not in separate worlds simultaneously (the law of
only because the discovery may lead to prevention, no divergence in Λ)—a law that invites us to
better teaching methods, and a cure, but also cherish the permanence, repeated occurrence, and
because it may allow us to preserve the roots of a certainty of what we “know.”
sustainable social system: the constructive doubt I hope I prove that the laws of divergence and
and hope cherished by the child nurtured in no divergence, although seemingly opposed to one
empathy (the capacity for reconciling opposite another, are in fact complementary, and that within
emotions). creativity the two laws sustain each other. Niels Bohr
(cited in Barrow, 1999, p. 199) “explained” the
Suicide bombers who in their frenzy blow up complementarity between ambiguity and
innocent bystanders, women, and children in order certainty by writing that
to force the “enemy” into submission or flight do not
know what doubt and hope mean. They are the opposite of a correct statement is a false
statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may
convinced they will find gratification in paradise or, well be another profound truth.
at least, immortality. In their rigid inability to
welcome doubt, they resemble autistics; but the Perhaps Bohr meant that the truth may “lie” in
latter cannot conceive of hatred, cruelty, malice, or opposite places at the same time, a creative view
madness. Perhaps an inhumane education—one that, for very different reasons, autistics and
without empathy—leads unhappy fundamentalists to fundamentalists cannot accept. Imprisoned by the
misuse the innate flexibility that autistics have lost in “truth” they know, autistics are incapable of denying
some way or never developed in full because of a it in order to enter the funny, marvelous, and
genetic mishap or post-partum trauma. terrifying realm of ambiguity and fantasy.
Entering the world of fantasy is an amusing but
Autism may lead us to the discovery of the roots risky proposition. We may get stranded or land in
of mental balance and imbalance. Furthermore, it worlds that our companions cannot recognize
allows us to challenge the mystery of creativity in the (namely, insanity). Furthermore, if we pursued
mind and in the universe. power, we would be free to deceive others (the case
Indeed, we need autistics as much as they need of fundamentalists driven by overweening self-
us.
importance), without realizing that we would end up autistics can neither play with control to serve the
deceiving only our selves. truth, as good defense lawyers and prosecutors do,
nor play with the truth to serve control, as malevolent
Autistics cannot lie or deceive others. They trust liars do.
what they know and reject what they do not know. If creativity is used to help others grow, it
There is a common misperception that autistics refreshes the self; but in the case of the person or
dislike the company of other people: in fact, they the system that misuses it, it can lead to destruction.
cling to and trust those who present familiar features Perhaps the key message of this book is that
to them, even if they are liars. Autistics are easily understanding autistics’ plight can help us master
deceived by those who stand here and there at the power of creativity before it grows dangerous.
once by pretending to feel what they do not feel or
by lying about what they intend to do. In 1997, upon completing my research on autism
at Harvard University, I realized that autistics fail
Autistics cannot understand that being in tests in which a sense of ubiquity is de rigueur. The
opposite worlds simultaneously is equivalent to final chapter of my master’s thesis points to the
being and nonbeing at the same time. To them, critical role that simultaneity plays in renewing
we either are or are not. reality. Thus I proposed (Cassella, 1997, p. 72) two
main concepts:
Thus autistics cannot lie; and neither can they
participate in spontaneous discourse or daydream 1. Decoupling from familiar knowledge seems to be
by simultaneously siding with 1 and 0, here and a necessary step in formulating competing
there, left and right, in front of and behind, up and meanings of the same referent.
down, before and after, small and large, low and
high, poor and rich, young and old, you and me, yes 2. New knowledge implies taking a temporary view
and no, truth and falsity, and so on and so forth. of a specific event as being and not being at
the same time.
Our autistic consciousness forces us to oppose
the unknown with the known, or falsity with truth at Both concepts imply the law of divergence. In
all times. That is why in a trial the prosecutor will go December 2000, having written my doctoral thesis in
out of his or her way to prove a defendant’s guilt, as the sciences of education at Universidad Nacional
the defense lawyer does to prove the same Experimental Simón Rodríguez (UNESR) in
defendant’s innocence. Yet, by listening to the Venezuela, I added five more laws that autistics are
creative side that reminds us that doubt is always unable to follow, leaving them incapable of
present, good prosecutors will not forget that a integrating new ideas or schemes (Cassella, 2000).
defendant may be innocent. Similarly, good defense Later, I added two more laws, for a total of eight
lawyers remain aware that their client may be guilty. (Cassella, 2002b). (There may be more!) I also
concluded that autistics follow eight laws, which
Within the crossroads created by doubt, truth allow them and us to recognize the “permanence” of
and falsity meet in the same defendant—a paradox. things in space and time.
Because of their difficulty in dealing with paradox,
Arriving at my view of the laws that autistics In more detail, a defendant may be innocent (p =
follow and the laws they ignore⎯through a bivariate 1), even if the jury gives a verdict of guilty (p = 0).
correlation matrix (Cassella, 1997, 2000)⎯was not Hence, simultaneity includes both limits (p = 1 and p
too difficult. But logic and the scientific method per = 0) and the whole cluster of possibilities between
se, although very necessary, could not explain the them (0 < p < 1). Within simultaneity, then, each
bizarre nature of the creative intelligence that possible option is and is not true.
autistics lack and that we often misunderstand or Embracing the whole cluster and its limits—the
misuse. Only through a series of serendipitous result of doubting—is the best way of exploring the
coincidences was I able to understand the strange mystery behind the alleged crime.
way in which we integrate banal laws (for example,
the law of no divergence) with absurd laws (for For instance, I heard the story of a mailman who
instance, the law of divergence). was unjustly sentenced to fifty years in jail for rape.
The prosecutor, by rigidly adhering to his
In the infinite space and time of the creative side responsibility to prove the mailman guilty, led the two
of intelligence, the magical laws that autistics cannot rape victims, who were not sure that the defendant
understand suggest that things are and are not at had assaulted them, to testify that the mailman had
the same time. Thus magic and pretense inhere in done it. Exaggerating his inflexible stance, the
seeing and intending a simultaneous conjunction prosecutor also led the witnesses, who had clearly
and disjunction between “yes” and “no,” “truth” and seen the defendant at home with his wife while the
“falsity,” and “1” and “0.” victim was being raped in her house, to doubt that
The world of simultaneity lives in the mind of the they had seen him there that day. Five years later,
comedian, who plays with opposite meanings of the after the real criminal confessed, the prosecutor,
same text or sign; of the actress, who comes and realizing his mistake, reopened the trial and, turning
goes among the characters she plays; and of the around 180 degrees, helped free the mailman. What
creative scientist, who finds novelty by connecting caused him to blunder in the first place? Let us use
what extant knowledge and logic refuse to connect. the dance of autistic sequence with creative
Instead of seeing the play of opposite tenets as simultaneity, or the Logos model, to analyze the
absurd, we should consider it nonlogical (between case.
the logical and the illogical), metalogical (beyond In the first trial, the prosecutor, led solely by the
logic), or prelogical (before logic), laws of sequence, sought the punishment of the
mailman because he believed that the defendant
For example, when we are in doubt, we may had to be in one place at a time. Unfortunately,
think of the hypotheses we set forth as being true he chose the crime scene (the wrong choice)
and false simultaneously, for as long as we do not instead of the defendant’s home (the right choice).
know what’s going on, they are neither absolutely However, the prosecutor was right in assuming that
true nor absolutely false. Hence, doubt about the the mailman could not have been in separate
legitimacy of what we perceive or conceive implies a worlds at once. That is exactly why he corrected
distribution of probability between existence or truth his mistake after the real criminal confessed. Really,
(p [probability] = 1) and nonexistence or falsity (p = if the offender was not the mailman, then the
0). defendant must have been in a place
different from the crime scene the day the the beginning and to free the same man in the end.
rape occurred. Thus, the witnesses who saw the He went from seeing guilt to seeing innocence in a
mailman with his wife had been right, whereas the flash. He never crossed the world between 1
rape victims had been wrong. (order) and 0 (chaos) in which incomplete
The core issue here is that, in the manner of information, doubt, patience, compassion, love, and
autistics, the prosecutor arrived at the truth by trial hope (figure 1) lead us to the truth if we are patient
and error or after the fact. The same law of enough. In short, the prosecutor never used the laws
sequence led him to condemn an innocent man in of simultaneity to see.
T h e W o rld of 1 A s O p p o se d to 0
( w ithin S E Q U E N C E or F I N I T E N E S S )
O rd er (1 ) Chaos (0)
P e r fe c t L es s-th an -p erfe c t co n tro l, I m p e r fe c t o r
c o n tr o l, b alan ce , n o c o n tr o l,
y e s, tr u th ,
c e r ta in ty , d o u b t, am b ig u ity , n o , fa lsity ,
e x iste n c e , p ro b ab ility d istrib u tio n , n o th in g n e ss
c la ssic sc ie n c e , m ag ic , evo lu tio n , su p e r stitio n ,

g e n e r a l r e la tiv ity , q u an tu m p h y sics , ir r a tio n a lity ,
r e p e titio n , r a n d o m n e ss,
c o n se r v a tio n ,
fan tas y , h u m o r, trag ed y , m yth , ch a n g e,
u to p ia , art, m etap h o r, re n o vatio n , d iffe r e n tia tio n ,
freed o m , d em o crac y ,
h ie r a r c h y , a n a rch y,
co m p etitio n in c o o p eratio n ,
le g itim a c y , lo v e, p atien c e, m o th er, h o p e, ille g itim a c y ,

fa th e r , faith , e m p ath y, c o m p a s sio n n o fa th e r ,
to b e , to b e an d n o t to b e n o t to b e ,
a u tism m a d n e ss
T h e W orld b etw een 1 an d 0

( w ithin S IM U L T A N E IT Y , IN F IN IT Y ,
o r L E S S -T H A N -P E R F E C T IO N )
Figure 1. The Complementarity between Sequence and Simultaneity
The first and third columns, which are mutually exclusive, list aspects of sequence or finiteness, the
principle that rules reality, or the world of one (order) as opposed to zero (chaos)—as viewed by
autistics and the autistic side of the mind. In the center column I list aspects of simultaneity or
infinity, the principle that rules the world between 1 and 0, or the fantasyland that “lies” between
order and chaos, or between perfection and imperfection. The world of the in between
encompasses 1 and 0, yes and no, order and chaos, or autism and madness at the same time; that is,
the center column is the first and the third columns simultaneously—a bizarre proposition.
Seeing creatively means listening to competing saw or that what we saw means what we think it
options, a feat that is akin to believing without means. Definitely, doubt may become extremely
believing. By contrast, the impatient prosecutor terrifying and destructive. However, the capacity for
abandoned doubt all too soon, thus leaving behind doubting—the social gift that is dormant in
hope, love, compassion, and faith in justice. A autistics—leads to renovation when we gather hope,
balanced doubt would have shown him that within love, patience, and humility (the second column in
ambiguous evidence, falsity meets truth in the same figure 1) to balance fear, anger, clarity, and the will
defendant (the second column in figure 1). Or better, to prevail over others (the first as opposed to the
in his mind’s eye, the prosecutor should have seen third column).
the mailman in at least two separate worlds at When we use the tension introduced by opposite
the same time: the victim’s house and his home. tenets in order to co-create the world with others, the
solution to our quandaries appears out of nowhere.
When we set aside, albeit momentarily, the
autistic belief that reality can be had only in a In my view, embracing opposite feelings is the
specific place at a specific time, we invite infinity or key to social growth. Yet, some prefer the way of
simultaneity to help us in providential ways. mathematics. Dealing with doubt by calculating
Autistics indirectly tell us that the lack of contact probabilities may help us make decisions that will
with simultaneity is extremely incapacitating. And beat the odds in the long run. But playing with
yet, although it seems extremely foolish, we are probability distributions is a poor way to exit
terrified to consciously welcome infinity into our confusion because by itself it teaches us how to use
home. Why are we so frightened? Possibly because our world, not how to grow with it. Can we use
of our gut feeling that simultaneity is also probabilities to get a subtle joke or to solve a riddle?
nothingness (the third column in figure 1). And to
most people nothingness is akin to death. Although it courts confusion, the world of humor,
Fortunately, the sheer reality of autism suggests that mystery, and creativity (the second column) offers us
simultaneity is more than death: It is the crossroads an opportunity to arrive at “con-fusion,” the
between life and death (the second column in figure resonant integration or communion with the universe
1, or the first and the third columns simultaneously). in which competition plays with cooperation. If they
One of its facets is doubt. enter through that door, scientists may find a truer
theory, artists may find beauty, and the humble and
Like death, doubt “lies” behind everything we patient may find truth and beauty.
perceive. Doubt is tormenting. It can create
unbearable fears that may lead, paradoxically, to a How can we teach toddlers to face the torment
false clarity, which after a time might be viewed as of uncertainty with patience and humility?
the “truth.” If that happens, we leave true reality It is all too easy to embrace the peace of mind
behind—sometimes forever. provided by certainty. But it is quite difficult to kneel
An excess of doubt robs us of our ability to have before the power of doubt. Saint Anthony said
reasonable expectations and in extreme cases of cryptically that humility favors the communion with
the clarity of what we have witnessed. Indeed, unlike nature. The legend goes that the fish, to which he
autistics, we will never be sure that we saw what we
humbly preached, understood his message. Will we deny the world of empathy in favor of short-term
understand it? gain. That is why the mother who smiles at the
frightened toddler after a fall teaches her child that
Humility helps us make sound decisions and we succeed beyond our dreams when we face pain
attain the unattainable. Only with a humble mind can or adversity with patience and even wonder. Indeed,
we court the folly that may lead us to novelty. That is obstacles can help us explore the paradoxical roots
the way to believe without believing and to obey of creativity: to believe without believing, to obey
without obeying. How do we do this? without obeying, and to control without controlling.
The loving mother will teach her child that real
We become humble when we give up absolute power can be had only when we dance with the
control, knowing that by sharing control we create, wind, not when we oppose or follow it.
grow, and help other travelers create and grow.
Thus, it follows that we must not submit to dictators,
fundamentalists, or idealists who see only their ways.
We know that whoever holds to the folly of absolute
truth denies the creativity of the other. Indeed,
humble people court doubt for the sake of the other
whom they value as much as they value their selves.
As in a democracy based on compassion and not on
fear or greed, we oppose the tyrant or the
fundamentalist who wants it all, not because we are
rigid and proud, but because we are flexible and
humble.
Because of humility, a young mother who lost Before the advent of modern sailing techniques,
her husband in a terrorist strike will overcome her sailors had to wait for favorable winds. That is why,
despair, console her crying baby, and seek joy before the seventeenth century, it took years to
behind her sadness. She will overcome her anger, travel from the Red Sea to the Far East and back.
and even her hatred, because she is humble; and For ancient sailors, the wind helped only when it
she is humble because she knows that holding on to blew in the direction they wanted to go. Still, it is
anger and hatred will harm her child. By looking into counterintuitive to realize that favorable winds are
the young mother’s eyes—the gaze that autistic the most dangerous ones. That is, if we knew only
children cannot emulate—the baby will perceive the how to sail with the wind on our back, we would be
anguish in her doubt, and also her hope and love. lost if the wind changed or if we changed our
destination: we could neither return nor go in a
The core of infant education is teaching babies direction different from the one imposed by the wind.
the importance of the world between 1 and 0 (figure The problem would not arise if we always knew what
1), in which hope and humility help us play with would happen and what we wanted; but in a
opposite desires and feelings. To impose our universe in which we must balance our will with the
feelings, knowledge, and desires on a weaker will of others, and even with the independent will of
person—as tyrants, pedophiles, and liars do—is to different aspects of our selves, that is not possible.
Conservation or permanence, the only

Humility teaches us to reach freedom by valuing anchor that allows us to explore the mysteries of
the expected and the unexpected. Only the sailor the universe without getting lost, can be sustained
who obeys without obeying by sharing control with only through the doubt that leads to renovation.
unpredictable winds goes free.
Humility prevents us from abandoning our The world of ambiguity that autistics cannot
selves either to the desire to control others or to their fathom, tormenting though it may be to the rest of
control. Humility and virtual obedience (that is, us, is the only world in which we can find the
obeying without obeying) thus lead to the freedom freedom to renew permanence. Only within the
that dwells between total control and no control (the infinity between order and chaos, 1 and 0, yes and
center column in figure 1, p. 14) in the world of order no in which we look at something and at its opposite
and chaos. at the same time—are we free to hope, to love, to
At the same time, we cannot discount the choose, and to create.
sequential and primary world of order as opposed to
chaos (the first column as opposed to the third In the next chapter, I explore in depth the dance
column in figure 1), which autistics recognize. of sequence—the principle that drives autistic
Conserved reality is the only place in which we conservation—with simultaneity, the principle that
recognize our “permanent” identities and the animates creative renovation. Both principles are
seemingly unchanging identities of fellow travelers; important. As suggested by the Logos model, the
there we find stable and familiar words and the complementarity between conservation and
home that sustains us while we create novel renovation animates all processes of becoming,
interpretations of the self and of the other. mental and physical.
CHAPTER 2 The Dance of Sequence with Simultaneity

*******************************************************************
Since 1989, when my son was about two years old, I relation to a task in which, against my expectations,
*
noticed that he recognizes and cherishes recurring they succeeded.
patterns (for example, the sight of his own image in
a mirror, people he knows, idiosyncratic sounds, My experiments allowed me to view creative
isolated words, jumping, hand flapping, and so on). consciousness as the product of the
He adores the known, or the world that my wife and I complementarity between sequence, finiteness,
have introduced to him in baby steps, and rejects or perfection as opposed to imperfection and
novelty, or the unknown. His autism is especially flexible simultaneity, infinity, or less than
noticeable in his paralyzing confusion about perfection.
pretend play and the correct use of pronouns.
My son cannot match the “con-fusion,” or the For example, we sent astronauts to the moon for
integration of mine with yours (its opposite), which the first time by integrating well-known processes
his unimpaired peers display with such ease. (perfection) with new or lesser-known processes
Similarly, he does not realize that when (less than perfection), a fascinating and ambiguous
impersonating someone else, children “become” that enterprise. Indeed, when welcoming the hero who
person, although they continue to be who they are. comes back from outer space alive, empathy invites
He lacks the innate cognitive skill that makes us to remember the one who went but never came
someone an impersonator: the ability to integrate back. Thus, a creative person’s success is rarely
what is with its opposite, is not. due to the perfect control provided by rigid
When children use pronouns or play pretend, knowledge or to wild luck. Within doubt, or less than
then, they are and are not at the same time. perfection, creative minds embrace need and
chance simultaneously; unfortunately autistics
The seemingly absurd capacity for being and not recognize only need and reject chance.
being another person or thing—a skill that I attribute
to simultaneity—may easily go awry or become According to my findings, autistics recognize
twisted. My desire to help normal children develop or see the object or referent—together with its name,
well and in full their potential for simultaneity, and to unique meaning, and function—that can be seen in
help autistics regain this magical endowment, led one place at a time and that does only one
me to explore the autistic way of looking at reality. thing. In other words, they operate only with the
Besides, I came to believe that understanding rigid side of the normal mind which leads us to
autism is understanding the mind. believe that the future will be a repetition of the past.
In 1996, with the help of the Boston Higashi Both we and autistics are so fascinated by repetition
School and the University of Massachusetts in that we assign a specific name and meaning to
Boston, I measured the performance of eighteen patterns that are conserved, that is, patterns that do
autistic subjects in a task in which autistics generally
*
fail. Also I was the first researcher to test autistics in I briefly describe the two tests and my experiments in the next
chapter. The reader can find detailed explanations in the
appendix of my book The Flameless Fire (Cassella, 2002b).
not “change.” This is a miracle, since if an object oscillation between two objects. In fact, we are
rotates or we walk around it, every point of view dealing with both, for oscillation rests on
presents a different image. simultaneity. Indeed, it takes time to transform the
bell into its complement, the goblet, and vice versa.
For example, to the autistic or rigid side of the Still, my autistic son will see only what he knows
mind, a bell will always be a bell. In more detail, if we best—say, the bell—unless I tell him that he is
ring a bell at point A before moving it to point B, the seeing a goblet and show him that he can use it to
object we may want to ring at the end of the drink. If he believes me, and uses the goblet, the bell
sequence will be that bell. If we stop at any point will have vanished, passing from existence to
along the path AB, our autistic side will still see the nonexistence.
bell and its unique and permanent meaning. But where did the bell go when I turned it upside
But there is something the rigid side of the down? It went nowhere because it was, is, and will
mind will never think of: If we wish to slake our thirst, be a goblet, in the same way that it was, is, and will
we can transform the bell into a goblet by turning it be a bell.
upside down.
Again, the oscillation that allows us to see only
Autistics’ misfortune stems from their inability to one thing at a time is real, and the simultaneity in
also listen to the flexible side of the mind, which which one thing is several things at the same time is
enables us to see the new functions of an object also very real.
beyond its apparent, customary, or prototypical Still, the world of simultaneity can court
value. An autistic individual might find the new madness. In fact, at times our creativity leads us into
function by accident, and not because he or she saw thinking that the image we observe when we stand
it in the mind’s eye before the fact. in front of a mirror may be a different person.
Persuasive actors rely on this very maddening
Now, is the bell a goblet or not? thought! Fortunately, they can easily come back to
their selves. The truly mad cannot.
It is easy to see that in this example the laws of When we act as actors do, we go mad only
sequence—such as separate worlds cannot temporarily because the autistic side of our minds
occupy the same space at the same time—are does not listen to our weird thoughts; and we do not
not violated. Indeed, whenever we place the remain prisoners to autism because our creative
bell/goblet in a vertical position, we see either a bell side listens to both the legitimacy of the known and
or a goblet; that is, although we can use the object to its denial. As with actors, creative people are
to drink champagne or rudely call the waiter, we autistic and insane simultaneously.
cannot have both at the same time. And if we put
down the bell/goblet horizontally, we can neither ring Without simultaneity, there is no choice; without
the repetitive ding-dong that the autistic side of our choice, there is no renovation; without renovation,
minds likes nor drink. reality cannot be sustained; and without permanent
beliefs with which to operate, simultaneity becomes
The perspicacious reader will ask whether we purposeless.
are truly dealing with simultaneity or with an
We need to hold to two different sides of the Pronouns are magical and unsettling at the
mind, the autistic and the creative one. For instance, same time because they can transform any person
without the creative side, we could not handle into its “opposite,” as in the bell/goblet. Autistics’
pronouns correctly. Let us see why. failure to master the use of pronouns suggests that
only when our creative side works in tandem with
Imagine that we are two autistic astronauts our rigid side can we deal with the changes of
floating in a space ship, and that we look at a context introduced by pronouns.
floating bell/goblet, which I see as a bell (with its rim
down), and you as a goblet (with its rim up). Again, both sides of our minds are necessary:
the creative side, which chooses new patterns, and
the rigid side, which conserves them.
The rigid side works with symmetry, which calls
for the conservation of an object or of the
I-BELL relationship among objects when rotated. Autistics
love symmetry to the point that they cannot imagine
YOU- that an object (for example, the bell/goblet) may
GOBLET acquire a different identity or function when rotated
in any way. By contrast, simultaneity allows us to
Now, if you ask me for the goblet, I will not give become someone else by turning around.
you the bell—although the goblet is the bell. The fact The transformation begins in our minds. For
is that, to me, the goblet is not the bell, as down is example, a little girl who pretends that she is her
not up. In line with what I know best, I may become mother while she plays with her doll goes and
upset by your strange habit of using the bell to drink, comes between two different characters and
whereas you will despise me for wandering around functions as if she were both at the same time.
the space ship ringing the goblet. The obstacle to Hopefully, with her ability to “lie” here and there at
communication is the autistic inability to realize that once she displays the love that some day will make
the same object can be used in mutually exclusive her a real mother and her dreams come true.
ways, or that something can be its opposite at the
same time. The pretending little girl shows us that the
capacity to see one object in separate worlds or
For this same reason, autistics cannot overcome see independent worlds in one object—a magic
the confusion generated by our use of pronouns. In that violates reality—is not the exclusive province of
a normal conversation, for example, although I call a sorceress or a quantum physicist.
myself “I” and you “you” when I talk, I take your The Logos model suggests that we all can
name, “you,” and you take my name, “I,” when you explore the magical world of creativity by
talk. But how can we both oscillate between the understanding why autistics cannot think of violating
names “you” and “I” unless, somehow, I were you reality. Autism, more than any other phenomenon,
and you were me—that is, unless we both stood allows us to separate the laws of sequence from the
here and there simultaneously, as in the case of laws of simultaneity—an unnatural feat—and learn
the bell that is also a goblet? about the distinct natures of these two principles.
For example, autistics’ difficulty in seeing the

goblet and the bell at the same time shows us that Reversible simultaneity points to the polyvalence
transformation begins when we cross in “no by which one object can have opposite functions at
time” the chasm between mismatched the same time. Likewise, by virtue of simultaneity,
contexts—for example, ringing the bell/goblet we may conceive of a new or unknown object by
versus drinking from it. So, within simultaneity, the connecting in a new way or for the first time two or
goblet is and is not the bell, as the bell is and is more familiar objects. For example, long ago
not the goblet. someone created a bow and arrow by linking the two
ends of a flexible branch with a liana. When the bow
We tap simultaneity when we understand that was invented, two different, yet familiar, entities (a
separate, mismatched, or clashing worlds may liana and a branch) joined to create a new entity (a
occupy the same space at the same time (the law bow).
of convergence in Λ)—a bizarre thought.
It takes time to move from anger to contentment The power of the bow arises from the absurd
or from here to there. With the bell/goblet, however, fact that its two end points are opposite and
time is suspended. The bell can become a goblet complementary at the same time, since each is the
faster than the speed of light, because in our minds cause and the effect of the other.
it is already a goblet the instant we decide to turn it
upside down. To us, the two universes coexist in The bow and the bell/goblet reflect a strange
the same object just as the same object is in aspect of the dance of simultaneity with sequence:
both universes at the same time. In other words, in any physical or social system (a molecule, a cell,
the goblet comes from the bell and the bell comes an individual, a family, a country, or the universe),
from the goblet. growth “lies” in the simultaneous union and
Thus, as absurd as this may seem, we might separation of competing views.
also say that within simultaneity, a cause can be
exchanged with its effect (the law of reversibility By virtue of creative simultaneity, everything can
in Λ) or that a thing is and is not its complement. be separated from and integrated with everything
else, as in a true democracy. For example, a circle is
By contrast, autistics cannot fathom reversibility. very different from a square. Nevertheless, Einstein
They cannot look at the bell and simultaneously see resorted to simultaneity when he integrated a circle
its reverse, antithesis, or complement: the goblet: with a square. In fact, according to Narlikar (1996, p.
They are chained to a reality in which things 80), Einstein managed to fit a square peg into a
“change” only through a repetitive and irreversible round hole, modifying both the peg and the hole,
cause-and-effect sequence. For instance, I buy raw when he resolved the conflict between Newton’s
eggs frequently because I like fried eggs for theory of gravity and the special theory of relativity.
breakfast. Unlike the goblet that comes from a bell
and may become a bell again, my son easily
recognizes that the fried egg originally was a raw
egg. However, he cannot imagine that the fried eggs + =
I like indirectly generate the raw eggs I buy.
Our autistic side, however, must reject

Actually, Newton had based his theory of gravity simultaneity in order to preserve the illusion of the
on instantaneous interaction, but the theory of constancy of patterns and the repetition of
special relativity denied simultaneity or infinite irreversible cause-and-effect sequential schemes.
speed. Einstein proposed that gravitational fields
bend spacetime, creating the illusion of the I found that sequence or finiteness (perfect
simultaneity that Newton had observed. control as opposed to no control [the first as
For example, a massive gravitational field can opposed to the third column in figure 1]) nestles in
bend the light rays from a star in such a way that an eight banal laws—for example, “nothing can lie
observer at the opposite end of the alignment sees in separate, mismatched, or opposite worlds
two stars instead of one (Narlikar, p. 92). at the same time” (no divergence), “separate
worlds cannot occupy the same space at the
Nevertheless, there may indeed be two stars, or, same time” (no convergence), and “effects
better, it may be impossible to find out whether there cannot precede or be exchanged with their
is one (unity) or two (multiplicity). causes” (no reversibility).
As long as we doubt, we can hope. If we ever In short, to the autistic side of the mind, which
arrived at the final truth, doubt and hope would be follows the laws of sequence, I am what I am and
unnecessary, and so would be our lives. Fantasy you are what you are, dear reader, because I am
and doubt create the play between unity and here and you are there.
multiplicity, equality and difference, and integration By contrast, if you are simultaneously there and
and differentiation. here, in my space, while I am here and there, in your
The core issue in creativity is valuing both space—a ghostly situation—we have entered the
certainty and ambiguity. Similar to the hidden face of bizarre realm of simultaneity.
the moon, what we do not see of another person Small children are not afraid to enter it, perhaps
may be as real as what we do see. Thus, the old because we are all born without suspicion, malice,
adage “seeing is believing” (sequence) and hatred toward others. Empathy is innate,
complements “seeing is and is not believing” whereas self-pity, fear, hatred, and the use of
(simultaneity). simultaneity to aggrandize the self must be taught.
Perhaps regaining an awareness of simultaneity, the
If we desire to refresh the world of visible reality, inner dynamics of our artistic side, and putting it to a
we must temporarily place it between parentheses good use will help us educate our children better.
and enter the realm of creativity. Once we come
back to the reality in which a thing can never be Simultaneity, infinity, or less-than-perfect control
other than what it is, we forget the skies of fantasy in (the magical vacuum and plenitude between perfect
which opposites meet. Still, when we come back and imperfect control) plays with eight exceedingly
with something new, as Einstein did, the reality in absurd laws—for example, “anything may ‘lie’ in
simultaneity cannot be denied, although there is no separate, mismatched, or opposite worlds at the
way that we can observe simultaneity in reality. same time” (divergence), “separate worlds may
occupy the same space at the same time”
(convergence), and “effects may precede or be mind has difficulty accepting that creation relies on
exchanged with their causes” (reversibility). the dance of the visible (sequence or finiteness) with
the invisible (simultaneity or infinity). Fortunately for
The laws of simultaneity are magical. They allow us, the reality of autism throws light on the mystery
us to think of wizards who become invisible or fly on of social intelligence and consciousness.
a broomstick (as in the Harry Potter films), to see Because they are conscious of the certainty
departed souls in our dreams, and to dream of guarded by sequence and lack the bias toward
things and places we have never seen before. For ambiguity provided by simultaneity, autistics teach
example, once I dreamed that I played an us that the two sides of human intelligence can be
enchanting musical theme, which I had never heard examined separately.
of before, on a strange musical instrument I had
never seen in my life. Considering, in addition, that I Separation does not mean that the two
play no instrument whatsoever, whence came the principles are independent of each other. In fact,
information and skills that converted me in an nothing can come to exist without simultaneity or the
artisan, composer, and musician with the speed of drive toward renovation, and nothing can remain in
light? existence without sequence or the inclination for
There is no question that the laws of conservation.
simultaneity deeply violate reality. Does that mean For example, I wonder whether I should spend
that the use of fantasy and dreams should be my limited resources to visit my son in Venezuela,
excluded from serious affairs? visit my mother in Italy, or finish a project in Boston.
Not at all! While I doubt, I am and am not in Boston, I am and
am not in Venezuela, and I am and am not in Italy.
Although they follow seemingly opposite laws, in This kind of flexible thinking is akin to being in three
fact simultaneity and sequence are dissimilar worlds simultaneously or to forcing
complementary. Autistics’ significant cognitive three worlds to occupy the same space at the same
deficit elucidates the key role of simultaneity in time (in my person)—a consubstantiality that
creative intelligence. Autistics worry about autistics and the autistic side of the normal mind
conserving reality and oppose any attempt at cannot conceive of. Because the rigid side of my
renovation. Paradoxically, the only way to conserve mind believes that I will go to one place only, it will
reality is to renew it. For example, we must continue force me to buy only one ticket. But with the flexible
to learn new tricks in order to keep our jobs and to side of the mind, which allows me to consider my
fight new strains of the bacteria and viruses that needs as well as the needs of others, I will choose
menace our lives. which ticket to buy.
We can make the most of our ability to deal Simultaneity allows us to think flexibly when we
with change, the only permanent phenomenon in the need to readjust our rigid routines. Autistics cannot
universe, if we value both a divided attention and do that; they can think only rigidly.
intention, which arise from invisible simultaneity, and
a focused or undivided attention and intention, Nothing exemplifies rigid repetition better than
which emerge from a knowledge of the visible cause measurement. Could we have manufactured a
of a sequential process. Unfortunately, the human million replicas of the Volkswagen Beetle without the
benefit of measurement? Measuring tapes cannot to, but not seriously think that the same model
be made of rubber! They must be very, very rigid, to owned by my neighbor is the stolen car. Likewise,
the point that a change in workers’ shifts at a car the presence of two electrons in the orbital around
factory cannot change the end product. the helium nucleus does not imply that the “same”
Galileo and Newton thought that certain aspects electron is in two places at the same time. (Actually,
(dimensions and weight, for example) can be there are two electrons—which differ by their spin—
measured independently of the observer, and that and each can be anywhere within the orbital that
other aspects (taste, for example) exist only as confines them.)
physical and unique relationships between an object The truth of the matter is that the pictures, the
and an observer. cars, and the electrons are equal and different
Einstein posited that everything in the universe simultaneously, a conclusion at which we arrive
is relative to the observer, with the exception of the with the help of the artistic side of the mind. To its
only absolute: the speed of light. dancing partner—the autistic one—things are either
Finally, quantum physicists consider that we can equal or different. Only objects that are
observe nothing as it really is because the act of simultaneously equal and different make stable
observing changes what is observed. That is why, systems.
according to Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, we Any group or system calls for the simultaneous
cannot know both the position of a particle and its separation and union of its components, and that
*
speed simultaneously. If we try to measure the feat—which we take for granted—escapes my son’s
speed of an electron, for example, we alter its comprehension. He cannot understand that three
position; and if we try to measure its position, we separate objects may easily become a system (for
alter its speed. Thus, because we cannot example, the bow and arrow as the product of a
simultaneously know the position and the speed of liana and two sticks) and easily become a different
the only electron attached to the hydrogen nucleus, object (another group) by addition or subtraction (for
that electron is in an infinite number of places at the example, if we add a resonance box, the bow and
same time (simultaneity) within the limits of its orbital arrow becomes a violin).
(the portion of space in which it is confined As I said earlier, one aspect of his cognitive loss
[sequence]). is that he rejects the suggestion that the same
We cannot measure speed and position thing can lie in separate worlds at the same time
simultaneously because we cannot observe and that separate things or worlds can lie in the
simultaneity in reality; that is, in the physical world, same space at the same time. Thus, in the
we cannot see the same thing in separate sequential reality cherished by the autistic side of
locations at the same time. For example, if we the mind, which loves the conservation of unique
send copies of the same picture to various friends in identities, different views of an object do not mean
different parts of the world, we cannot conclude that that there are different objects. In an example that B.
*
exactly the “same object” is found in many places at A. Maher provided, a section of a hollow pipe may
once. Further, if my car were stolen, I could pretend look like a circle when viewed end-on or like an
extended rectangle when viewed from the side.
*
This principle can also be expressed as our capacity to know
the location of a wave but not its speed or frequency and vice *
versa (Icke, 1995, pp. 69-61). In B. Maher to A. Cassella, July 16, 2002.
There are two views, but there is only one return with a new and sound idea to a universe in
object. which we can exist in only one place at a time.
In the domain of creative and witty simultaneity, Although the Logos model posits the existence
this reasoning, very necessary in exploiting the of an inconspicuous and flexible side of the mind
knowledge guarded by the autistic side of the mind, (the one impaired in autism), which corresponds to
is not enough to create new interpretations and thus quantum simultaneity, it does not contradict the
renew our knowledge before its obsolescence overwhelming evidence pointing to a conspicuous
becomes deadly. Creative folks who dance with and rigid side (the one spared in autism) that
infinity, before landing in a safe and sound reality, responds to the visible world dear to relativistic
ponder the absurd idea of one viewpoint and two sequence.
objects (recall the example of the bell that is also a Simultaneity is only a dream, but one that re-
goblet). creates the path of “reality.” By dreaming, we
contribute to the transformation of the world and the
As an example, I relate an anecdote. An self; if we are successful, we will continue being
inexperienced but courageous hunter decided to what we were and something else; that is, we will
cross a forest in Bengal in search of a sneaky snake grow.
marked with black rings alternating with yellow rings. To grow, we must be able to think in the world of
The hunter was told that the only way to catch the maybe or being and nonbeing, and to act
trickster was to grab it by the tail and neck with decisively in the world of being as opposed to
lightning speed. Upon seeing, sticking out of a thick nonbeing even if we quake in our boots. Again, in
brush, the tail of the sly snake he was after, the living creatively we need both the autistic and the
hunter grabbed it with his left hand while extending ghostly sides of the mind.
his right hand under the animal to block the head
that lay hidden in the bush. Imagine his surprise and In the next chapter I deepen my discussion of Λ
confusion when he heard the growl of a surprised by describing two tests that show the influence of
and confused tigress he had grabbed by the tail. the world of simultaneity (the world between 1 and
0) on the world of 1 as opposed to 0.
The moral of the “tale” is that an intelligent
person knows when to use sequence in seeing a
known object announced by two different
perceptions, and when to use simultaneity in seeing
two mismatched objects hiding behind a single
perception. (For example, the words “tale” and “tail”
hide behind the same sound pattern. Again, recall
also the example of the bell/goblet)
Invisible infinity or simultaneity appears when we

leave the known world in order to see incompatible
universes at the same time and vanishes when we
CHAPTER 3 Being in Two Places at Once

*******************************************************************
In 1996 I replicated an experiment called false-belief distinguish between the actual location and
task (Cassella, 1997). This experiment, which was somebody else’s idea of where the object might be.
suggested by D. Dennett (1978) and adapted for By contrast, judging from autistic children’s
autistic subjects by S. Baron-Cohen, A. M. Leslie, answer, it appears that they assume that the girl doll
†
and U. Frith (1985), demonstrates that autistics fail knows what they themselves know.
tests that present a violation of reality, as in the case
of a false belief. No theory I know of explains why autistics fail
*
In the task, which normal children pass around theory-of-mind tests, why normal children pass
the age of five, experimental subjects are asked to them, and what social intelligence is.
look at two dolls⎯a boy and a girl⎯who are playing On this issue, other researchers posit that
marbles in a room. The subjects are then shown that
the girl doll places her marbles under a pillow before • autistics lack the psychological insight or ability
leaving the room. While the girl doll is away, the boy to understand complex emotions and ambiguous
doll moves the marbles to a desk drawer. At this mental states (Baron-Cohen, 1995);
point a researcher asks the experimental subject • cannot extract meaning from contextual
where will the girl doll (who is about to enter the information so as to avoid a logical and literal—
room) look for her marbles. Normal children answer but false—interpretation (Happé, 1994);
that she will look where she left them, and autistics • cannot inhibit responses to salient stimuli, exit
say that she will search for them in the drawer. familiar knowledge, or override habits
summoned by a current context (Ozonoff,
The false-belief task is one of several Pennington & Rogers, 1991);
experiments conducted within the paradigm of a • lack self-monitoring, that is, the capacity to
mysterious cognitive dynamics called theory of mind regulate their behavior and expectations in
(e.g., Astington, Harris, & Olson, 1988; Baron- terms of a hypothetical context that runs counter
Cohen, Leslie, & Frith, 1985; Wimmer & Perner, to the immediately available context (Harris,
1983). Theory of mind sees social intelligence as the 1993);
ability to understand that although reality is what it is, • cannot easily learn from failure and reset their
other people may have thoughts and feelings about inner drives (Russell et al., 1991); and
it that differ from ours. The appreciation of others’ • are slower than normal controls in cross-modal
mental states allows us to improve the possibility of attention shifting (from sight to hearing, for
predicting their behavior. example) (Courchesne et al., 1994).
For example, normal children appear to
understand that different people may have different According to my interpretation of theory of mind
ideas about the location of an object and can (Cassella, 1997), autistics
*
This task fits the scheme of a false-belief story (as it must), but †
the details respond to my imagination. In B. Maher to A. Cassella, July 16, 2002.
• cannot temporarily enter a world decoupled from being what they are in one place at a time
reality, where natural laws and logic are (autism). Their magical pretend play courts
suspended; autism and madness simultaneously. Indeed,
• cannot look at an issue from two or more they would go insane if they became the girl
contradictory viewpoints or consider mutually doll, and only the girl doll.
exclusive alternatives; and
• fail to progress from disjunctives to conjunctives The magic behind normal subjects’ weird
or vice versa in integrating dissimilar views into discernment, which autistics cannot comprehend, is
a new whole. seeing the marbles—or anything, for that matter—
in two worlds at the same time. They accomplish
The core of my doctoral research establishes that feat by “existing” in two worlds at the same
that autistics cannot fathom simultaneity time, without abandoning the reality in which they
understood as the principle that drives our exist in only one world at a time.
capacity to refresh reality by harmonizing
mismatched and even contradictory Autistics’ failure in the false-belief task, then,
explanations of an event. validates the first law of simultaneity, namely,
Indeed, our ability to balance two clashing
beliefs without choosing one or the other (as we do 1. anything may “lie” in separate, mismatched,
when we understand a joke) or by choosing well (as or opposite worlds simultaneously
normal subjects do in giving the right answer in (divergence),
false-belief tests) introduces a weird insight: in
addition to existing in one place at a time, the and the first law of the down-to-earth cognitive set,
only interpretation of reality that autistics handle, sequence or finiteness, which autistics hold dear;
creative persons may “exist” in more than one that is,
place at the same time—a magical yet maddening
proposition that would have called for the prompt 1. nothing can lie in separate, mismatched,
intervention of the Inquisition four centuries ago. or opposite worlds at the same time (no
divergence).
I lean on this insight to highlight two stages in
the process that leads normal subjects to pass the Affirming that the human mind follows mutually
false-belief task described above. incompatible principles upsets the autistic side,
which knows only about itself. But the incongruity of
1. Both autistic and normal experimental subjects the laws of sequence and the laws of simultaneity is
show that they are of sound mind because they only apparent.
see the marbles in one place at a time, in the For example, most mothers are extremely
drawer. desirous of knowing and feeling what their children
see and feel when they are sick. However, they
2. Normal subjects realize that the girl doll sees the cannot leave their selves behind and enter their
marbles under the pillow because they become children’s bodies, nor are they willing to remain
the girl doll (madness), although they continue indifferent to the situation.
At this point, we all know that there is a magical To better explain the reality of fantasy, let us
way to do this: standing in mismatched worlds at examine a test known as appearance-reality
the same time before we “return” to the self we (Flavell, Green, & Flavell, 1986). Upon seeing a
never left behind fully. marble egg, normal four- to five-year-olds will say
that the object is a stone, even though it looks like
Standing in disparate worlds at the same an egg. Autistics will say that the object is an egg
time or sharing the same space simultaneously (Baron-Cohen, 1989).
with another person is possible only if the roles of As in the case of the false-belief test, according
guest and host are kept separate. In a way, only to the literature, what the experiment measures and
when we are fully within ourselves can we attempt to means is a mystery. In my interpretation, before
understand another person—a paradox, since we normal children arrive at the conclusion that the
must be the other person too. A good actress, for object they are questioned about is a stone, they
example, must fully stay in the here and now of her unconsciously think that an egg and a stone share
own body and mind even though she moves in the same space at the same time, which is
parallel to another mind, body, place, and time (as a inconceivable to an autistic individual. (Recall the
soprano can “be-come” Aida in Verdi’s eponymous example of the bell and the goblet in the previous
opera). This is the magical act performed by the chapter.)
normal subjects who pass false belief. They are born
actors, as we all are! This experiment endorses the second law of the
simultaneity that autistics lack, namely,
Again, to be in more than one location
simultaneously does not mean ceasing to be who 2. separate worlds can share the same space at
we are. In fact, if we ceased to be who we are, the same time (convergence),
simultaneity would vanish, as it vanishes when the
autistic side of the mind is at the helm—on and the second law of sequence, which is spared in
automatic pilot, of course. Therefore, we may board autism, that is,
the “space” of the other, in an “unreal” world beyond
space and time, as long as the self and the other 2. separate worlds cannot share the same
remain separate in a “real” place and time. space at the same time (no convergence).
Is simultaneity only a mental construct, a
fantasy, an illusion, or a dream? Indirectly or silently, As we have seen through the examples I have
autistics tell us that simultaneity is what drives our offered so far, the two laws complement each other
bias toward doubt, mystery, paradox, riddles, jokes, although they seem to contradict one another. And
metaphors, hope, empathy, and so on, creating what again, serious objections may be raised to this
appears as reality to our senses. As philosophers nonlogical conclusion.
and theologians stress, can the force behind the In brief, nonautistic children clearly say that the
creation of something be less real than what it has object is a stone although it looks like an egg. That
created? is, children look at a stone in the shape of an egg;
they do not say that they see an egg and a stone in Real danger often comes dressed in friendly
*
the same place at the same time. clothes. For example, animals desire and trust the
food they know. Some show curiosity about what
Nonetheless, when we say that two things are they do not know, and, although it is risky, they
different from one another, although they might be make exploratory moves to learn by trial and error.
very similar, we do not jump to that conclusion Still, they lack the elegance with which we come up
immediately or automatically, as autistics do. with a novel solution before the fact. (That is why we
To start with, autistic subjects know well that a tell the friend who shows no finesse, “Don’t be a
stone and an egg are different objects. They do not beast!”) But what is unimaginable to them is that the
fall into contradiction, although they are wrong; they food they know, trust, and desire can be different
clearly see the object as an egg. Normal subjects do from and even the opposite of what it appears to be.
not fall into contradiction either; they clearly see the Driven by the law of no convergence, which is within
object as a stone. Does that mean that, as with sequence, they are forced to think that everything
autistics, normal children never doubt what they cannot be but anything other than what it is. Thus,
see? when we hunt animals, we override their inherited or
learned rigid offense-defense techniques by virtue of
To autistics and to the rigid side of the mind, a magical species-specific ability: the flexibility that
objects are what they look like, unless reality shows the laws of simultaneity confer on us.
them otherwise. But that is not true for normal
children. The creative side of their minds is so For example, a fish will eat the bait we lower into
flexible that when they are questioned about what the pond because, like autistics, fish operate by the
they see, for a brief moment they will think that law of no convergence: They cannot imagine that
behind what they see “lies” a different thing and the prey they are after conceals a hook or that a
even the opposite of what they see. How else could prey and a hook can occupy the same space at the
Aristarchus of Samos in the third century B.C., see same time.
the opposite of what his eyes saw, that the earth
revolves around the sun? Thus, normal children see
the stone egg after a moment of doubt in which they
see the egg and the stone in the same space at the
same time. Recall the example of the hunter who
grabbed a tigress by the tail because he always
thought he knew what he was doing. Had he We too eat prey by the law of no convergence,
doubted in a realm beyond space and time, that is, but we catch it by the law of convergence, which
by thinking that a tigress and a snake could share teaches us how to hide death behind life-promising
the same space at the same time, he would have treats. If a fish learns to avoid the bait, it will escape
remembered in time that felines have fur and not death. However, that knowledge will not save it from
scales on their tails. other deadly schemes that our creative intelligence
may devise. On one hand its life will become
precarious if it refuses to eat the bait that it now
* views as fake (nonbeing); on the other hand, we will
In B. A. Maher to A. Cassella, July 16, 2002.
trick it with any tempting food (being) that its Still, without the firm beliefs that the autistic side
recognition has learned to trust owing to its innate of the mind cherishes and guards jealously, life
species-specific knowledge. would be impossible.
In the next chapter, I examine in more detail why
Definitely, what seems real, or being, may be autistics succeed in cognitive tests that, to normal
unreal, or nonbeing, just as what appears to be life- children, are as complex as the cognitive tests in
giving may bring death. which autistics fail.
Our apparent superiority over other animals is
simply our ability to exploit the power that “lies” in
the crossroads of life and death.
Olympus (eternal life, heaven) may turn into

Hades (eternal death, hell) when simultaneity is
absent or asleep.
Ulysses and his Greek companions were
invisible in the belly of the wooden horse left at the
main gate of Troy as a gift to the Olympian gods. As
with the fish that fails to see before the fact that the
hook and the prey it pursues occupy the same
space at the same time, the Trojans’ did not see the
real menace in the space occupied by its opposite,
*
namely, a friendly gift. To avoid defeat, they had to
realize that the horse was both on Mount Olympus
and in Hades, or that heaven and hell shared the
same space at the same time in the horse, or that
the fearsome Greeks, who were nowhere to be
seen, were actually there, or that the path of life
crossed the path of death.
By not considering that the horse was in two
diametrically opposed domains (life and death) at
the same time or that death was hiding behind
life, the autisticlike Trojans immediately saw
Olympus, or life, and got Hades, or death, instead.
Ulysses—the invisible intelligence that strikes from
nowhere—had tricked them successfully.
*
The myth of the Trojan horse and the autisticlike gullibility of
the Trojans are reflected in the Roman saying “Timeo Danaos et
dona ferentes” (I am afraid of the Greeks and of the gifts they
offer).
CHAPTER 4 Being in One Place at a Time

*******************************************************************
The tests in which autistics succeed reveal why they more persons have never lain on the same
are biased toward repetition, predictability, or perfect mat at the same time.
control, the desiderata that guide behavior-
modification techniques. Repetition and sameness
reaffirm legitimacy, perfection, and, in a way,
immortality.
Autistics’ penchant for the absolute rigidity (total
control) and the irreversibility (the notion that effects
must follow their causes) of sequential and repetitive
schemes can be observed in tests in which they are
more successful than normal subjects.
In Zaitchik’s photo task, or simply Zaitchik
(Zaitchik, 1990), Ernie, a Sesame Street character,
takes a picture of his friend Bert lying on a mat. Bert
leaves, and Big Bird takes Bert’s place on the mat. But the question of who lay on the mat leads
Pointing at the developed picture without showing its normal children to doubt what they saw five minutes
content, an experimenter asks the subject, “In the before. Doubt, fostered by the law of convergence
picture, who lies on the mat?” Acting in a way (“separate worlds may share the same space at
seemingly opposite to their behavior in false-belief the same time”) and founded on the principle of
tests, autistics answer Bert, although they see Big simultaneity, leads them to see both characters, Bert
Bird lying on the mat. They do well to the point of and Big Bird, “lying” on the mat at the moment the
outperforming normal subjects by two to one picture was shot, a violation of reality.
(Perner, 1993; Leslie & Roth, 1993). Because only one of the two characters is the
Because Zaitchik appears to be similar to and as legitimate protagonist of the event they need to
complex as false-belief tasks, the question arises: remember (the shooting of the picture), the other
what is the reason behind autistics’ astounding character may constitute a lie, for it is a false mental
performance? image. But that is precisely my point: because at
that moment they do not trust their autistic side—the
In my view, the outcome is due to the fact that, mirror of reality—they cannot know whether Bert or
unlike false belief, Zaitchik does not rest on the need Big Bird is the liar.
to violate reality as in the false-belief task, but to While in the autistic subjects the window that
honor it. The test calls for the sole application of the shows the past is clear, in their case it is murky.
law of no convergence, “separate worlds cannot Hence, to normal children, both characters are
share the same space at the same time,” which resting and “lying” on the same mat at the same
is founded on the principle of sequence. As a matter time.
of fact, autistic children clearly perceive that two or
†
In Zaitchick’s photo task the law of convergence interpretations. Since all of them except one
should submit to the legitimate authority of the law of embrace what never happened, our preoccupation
no convergence or remain dormant. Autistics have with keeping track of the correct explanation is
no problem with that, since they cannot easily wake understandable.
up their creative side. Reality and trust must be preserved at any cost.
The performance of autistics in the experiment Proper accounting and auditing in productive
shows that we may encounter predicaments in companies reflect this need. Without certain
which simultaneity becomes a liability—that is, knowledge of what has happened to us, there is no
situations in which the suspension of the autistic future; paradoxically, there is no future unless we
side of the mind may cause serious harm to the self. deny what we believe has happened in favor of
For example, if we doubted every syntax rule, every needed change. Both proposition are true; that is
word, syllable, and letter we encounter, how could why doubt is poison to accountants and manna to
*
we read a book or talk to others? Simultaneity lawyers and psychiatrists.
should intervene only when it is of help in some way.
This is precisely the crux of education, mental Returning briefly to Zaitchik, let us observe that
balance, and success; understanding at every while most normal subjects wander in the labyrinth
moment which side needs to be at the helm: the of doubt, autistics pass the test easily because there
autistic side, the creative side, or both. For example, is no room for doubting who is who when things
an autistic sentinel will stop the comrade who has cannot share the same space simultaneously.
forgotten the password and let in the enemy spy Indeed, dear reader, if you and I were to coincide
who has secretly uncovered it; still, Zaitchik clearly in the same space at the same time, doubt would
shows that doubting the meaning of what we arise over who is real and who is fake. It seems we
perceive, at times will bring havoc. owe the consciousness of the permanence of our
The behavior of autistic and normal subjects in individuality to the immovable belief that we cannot
Zaitchik suggests that the rise of simultaneity in pass through each other in reality.
human beings brings advantages and Let us pass now from a test in which we measure
disadvantages. the capacity for remembering the permanence of the
The Logos model may help explore the issue other (Zaitchik) to a test in which we remember the
further. capacity to remember the permanence of the self
(proper self).
A conflict between sequence and simultaneity
may indeed occur when we try to remember what In 1996, together with Dr. Helen Tager-Flusberg
happened. To autistics, what happened could not (then at the University of Massachusetts in Boston), I
have happened in any other way; to us, what tested eighteen autistics in relation to a false-belief
happened courts what could have happened, a task (see chapter 3). I also tested them for proper
feat that opens a Pandora’s Box of competing self (Povinelli, Landau, & Perilloux, 1996)—a
paradigm that reflects the recognition of what
* †
Difficulties in deciding whether to empower the laws of At least one alternative must respond to a cause-effect
simultaneity or the laws of sequence might cause dyslexia in scheme. The moment we think that an effect does not have a
susceptible individuals. cause—which is the case with total chaos—we are lost.
happens to the self over time—using a protocol self (Cassella, 1997). Why did they pass? For the
designed by Dr. Daniel Povinelli of the New Iberia same reason that they could easily have passed
Research Center in Louisiana. Zaitchik’s photo task. That is, they passed because
In the proper-self task, the leading experimenter from the time the pictures were taken until
stands beside a seated subject. A helper takes the the time the subjects saw them, the person
subject’s picture while the experimenter is on the sitting in the chair was the experimental
verge of surreptitiously placing a sticker on the subject and no one else. That is, the autistic
subject’s head. In a second picture, the sticker subjects in my sample clearly realized that they
resting on the head of the unsuspecting person is never shared the same chair with another
clearly visible. The experimental subject passes the person at the same time (Cassella, 2000, 2002a,
test if he or she takes the sticker off upon seeing 2002b).
one or both pictures.
The law of no convergence (p. 30) allowed them
to conserve their identity. In more detail, reliable
witnesses, or observers who conserve their identity
over time, legitimize the changes they have
observed; and legitimate changes confirm the
identity of the observer. I will explain this virtuous
circle by imagining a virtual experiment.
Suppose that before we show our experimental
subjects the picture in which they see the sticker on
their heads, we take the sticker off as surreptitiously
Proper self requires more than a recognition of as we placed it. Evidently, those subjects who would
one’s own identity in the picture. It calls for removing pass the test, when they reach for the sticker on
the sticker on one’s head. In doing so, subjects their heads, will not find it. Thus they will be led to
realize that a past experience (a concept or the believe that the person in the picture—
memory of a fact as, supposedly, it happened) notwithstanding the similarity with the representation
changed another concept or representation: the of the self stored in their minds—is not the self and,
memory of the legitimate picture of the self, who in addition, that another person was sitting on the
passed from not having a sticker on the head at the chair they never left (the law of convergence, p. 30).
beginning of the experiment to having one a few The monolithic “faith” of their recognition in the laws
minutes later. The idea that the environment has of no convergence and no divergence will start
changed the self—not the perception of the change cracking, and with it their capacity to conserve the
(which would occur if the subject looked in a identity of the self and the other. The law of no
mirror)—will prompt the experimental subjects who convergence, then, stands at the root of reliable
do not like what has happened to them to remove memories or representations. Without that reliability,
the sticker; most do so. the differentiation between the self and the other
would vanish. In sum, we owe the conservation of
Most autistic subjects in my sample failed false our identity to the law of no convergence.
belief, as expected. However, they passed proper
Paradoxically, there are cases in which we may level of genes the two species do share the same
share the same chair with someone else. For space at the same time.
example, in Disneyworld’s Haunted Mansion a ghost The fact that in the biota species share some
may sit in the same cart with us. This eerie genes (convergence-simultaneity) and do not share
experience may prove to some that the law of other genes (no convergence-sequence) suggests
convergence belongs solely to the realm of fantasy that the dance of the laws of sequence with the laws
or to the virtual reality that thrives on imagination. of simultaneity fosters creativity in the human mind
That is not entirely true! and in nature.
Perhaps an anecdote can help us explore the The opening step of the dance, virtual denial, is
point. sublime and dangerous. As it happens, if we rest too
About six months ago a nephew of mine long on the truth of what “is,” we will feel stifled; and
welcomed his first son into the world. The baby is if we rest too long on the falsity of what “is not,” our
the spitting image of his paternal grandfather. Upon denial of reality may reach a point where we may
seeing a picture of his grandson, the old man, who never return home to reality.
lives abroad, was left spellbound. He seemed to be The risk of getting lost in nonreality, the
reborn in the baby! In this case, can we say that the tradeoff we make when acquiring the capacity to
grandfather is the boy? Certainly not! Can we say willfully change the world, does not concern
that there is nothing of the grandfather in the boy? autistics. Simply, once they know something well,
No! The old man might resent my saying that he is they cannot deny it easily.
not in his grandchild when everyone “sees” that he
is. In a way, the grandfather and all his ancestors For example, consider the attributes of an ideal
*
are in the child. For example, the Bon Dance, a apple: red, round, weighing 200 grams, and so on.
Japanese festival that honors ancestors, is based on The autistic side of our minds sees the attributes of
this belief. an apple not as variable aspects of an invariable
entity but as either essential or nonessential
How can a multitude of persons—some dead features. For example, after my son liked the red
and some alive—share the same space at the same apple he was given for the first time, the next day he
time? said, “I want the red!” Why did he say that?
To him, the color red was, at that moment, an
The law of convergence or consubstantiation, essential component of the apple. He had, and
which autistics reject, is more than a metaphor. You continues to have, difficulty realizing that the color of
and I, dear reader, share about 98.5% of our genes an object—as when we objectify it by giving it a
with chimpanzees. If a presidential candidate had a permanent name: red, blue, or green, and so on—
98.5% probability of winning an election, in practice, may belong to other objects simultaneously. Still, he
he or she and the future president would be sitting now accepts now that apples come in more than one
on the same chair at the same time. Does that mean color. Driven by his love for perfect repetition, he
that chimpanzees and human beings are more or learned to recognize the unique and repetitive
less the same thing? They are not! And yet, at the
*
This example was proposed by B. Maher.
combination of the shape, taste, and odor of a into the apple that the devious witch offered her. But
prototypical apple, one that—for him—does not was that a “real” apple?
change (sequence). A creative mind, however, may To a trusting autistic, if it is red, round, weighs
recognize an apple at first and later deny it by 200 grams, smells like an apple, and tastes like an
pretending that it is not exactly what it is, and even apple, it is an apple. To a paranoid person, the same
state that it is more than what it seems to be thing is, no doubt, a poisoned apple. And to the
(simultaneity). Through denial, then, a real apple dreaming Snow White, the apple was and was not
*
may become a metaphor. an apple.
For example, the apple from the Tree of In my view, the princess ate the apple because
Knowledge that the snake gave to Eve (representing she was both autistic and mad. At first, she trusted
the creative aspect of intelligence) in order to get her autistic belief that the apple was an apple; but
Adam (the side of the mind spared in autism) out of she also hoped that the apple might bring her new
his autistic innocence enriched our lives by life—a yearning that compelled her to leave behind
introducing doubt, hope, and love. the safe monotony of her life in the woods with the
Seven Dwarfs. In biting into the apple, then, she
But at the same time, the devil poisoned and both affirmed (autism) and denied (insanity) her
embittered our existence by including in the deal an familiar world. I fancy that in the apple she saw a
unlimited capacity for suspicion and lying, the dark door into the crossroads of life and death.
aspect of simultaneity. Indeed, anybody and In poisoning the apple—that is, in hiding death
anything may lie to us and—the chasm from which behind the attributes of life—the witch too entered
the return to sanity becomes increasingly difficulty— the crossroads; but her sole purpose was stealing
we could lie to us. control away from, and not sharing it with, the
In my view, the apple from the Tree of simultaneity at large that refreshes the universe.
Knowledge stands for the world of the in between Inspired by simultaneity, however, the writer of the
(the second column in figure 1, p. 14) in which we tale saw in the apple more than the witch did: the
are free to fantasize, hope, love, cross our dreams life that was hiding behind the death that was
with others, and double-cross others in trying to fulfill hiding behind life.
our dreams whatever the cost to them.
In the end, the “poisoned” but magical apple with
*
Sometimes all the contradictory aspects of our which the devil enticed Eve and with which the
creative minds come together in a tale. As I said
*
before, with the movie Snow White, Walt Disney was The miraculous—and, consequently, nonlogical—play of
the first to use animation in expressing the magic of renovation offered by being and nonbeing is reflected in the
Eucharist, in which bread and wine change into the body and
our ambiguous intelligence. blood of Christ. As in a metaphor, the visible (bread and wine)
becomes unreal, whereas the invisible (the blood and body of
Revisiting the tale of Snow White and the Seven Christ) becomes real.
*
The apple was both poisonous and promising, like the tongue
Dwarfs may add to the legendary double meaning of
of the serpent that tempted Adam and Eve. Knowing the power
apples. In my view, the protagonist is not Snow of ambiguity, the serpent challenged our resolve to use the
White but the apple. We know that the princess bit freedom brought by simultaneity in co-creating the world with
others.
witch enticed Snow White was simultaneously life-

giving and life-taking. Had Snow White not bitten into
what was simultaneously a healthy and a deadly
apple, perhaps she would have married one of the
Seven Dwarfs. But that extraordinary option
vanished because for them she was dead, although
she was not “really” dead. She never changed—a
strange outcome, assuming we agree that
permanence is neither of life nor of death.
By chance, the prince arrived and kissed Snow
White—a way of denying death. The magic of a kiss,
one that dreamed of life and hoped that fantasy may
become reality, brought the princess “back” to a new
life.
What is growth but death and resurrection?
The next chapter focuses on the core of the

Logos model: the harmony between reality and
fantasy.
CHAPTER 5 Going and Coming: The Logos Model (Λ)

***************************************************************
In my view, proper self and Zaitchik, the two tasks would tie my arm to a heavy anchor. Yet I would be
discussed in the previous chapter, are analogous. ready to loosen the knot if the universe I dreamed of
Recall that both remembering what happened to us were more to my liking than the one I would be
(proper self) and what happened to others (Zaitchik) leaving behind.
are based on the belief that separate worlds
cannot share the same space at the same time
(no convergence) (Cassella, 2002b).
The conservation of reality promoted by the law
of no convergence holds a primary significance.
Perner (1993) and Leslie and Roth (1993) found

that passing Zaitchik is a necessary but insufficient
condition for passing false-belief tasks. This
observation agrees with my finding that those
subjects who passed false belief also passed proper
self, whereas passing proper self was necessary but
insufficient for passing false belief. Furthermore, my
experiments suggest that proper self and false belief
*
belong to different cognitive systems.
This means that the cognitive system that allows
experimental subjects to deal with fantasy (false As regards daydreaming, it is anchored in the
belief) relies on the system that conserves reality autistic conviction that we share a repetitive reality
(proper self and Zaitchik) and exceeds it. In other with the members of the social group we belong to,
words, we need a foothold in the capacity for even though each of us interprets the world in a
conservation—spared in autism—before we may unique way.
readjust it through the capacity for renovation— Within the Logos model (Λ), I call spacetime
impaired in autism. To be sure, although a foothold (figure 2, p. 37) the memory of all we witnessed (as
in reality is not sufficient to dream of novelty, without corroborated through proper self and Zaitchik), of
the grip on reality that the autistic side of the mind the processes and patterns that to our knowledge
provides, the self can fly away never to return. will recur in a predictable way, and of the beliefs that
we deem legitimate and true. One example of the
Could we go to bed easily if we thought that miracle of permanence and repetition is the rigid
while we were dreaming the wind of simultaneity meaning of the words we use to tell others what we
might take us to another universe? Personally, I clearly see and desire and to recognize what they
see and desire with all certainty. Another example is
the impression that we have of a unique and
*
The correlation between the two tasks is improbable since the
value I found was r = 0.33 (p < 0.05) (Cassella, 1997).
permanent identity (proper self), which others metaspace (figure 2), the hazy realm, beyond space
repeatedly recognize (Zaitchik). and time in which we meet simultaneity. In effect, if
upon entering metaspace we lost sight of spacetime,
we might never return with the novelties that are
Our sense of predictability, permanence, and needed to foster growth.
clarity, which makes spacetime—the reality blessed
by sequence—is vital. We use it as an anchor to For growth to happen, then, we must always
explore the mystery of the self and the other in go, and we must always come back.
Simultaneity
or infinity
eight
laws
Will
Proper self,
Zaitchik’s Metaspace
photo task
Recognition Understanding
(Clarity Desire) (Insight Strategy)
False belief,
Spacetime appearance-
reality
eight
Seeing
laws
Sequence
or finiteness
Figure 2. A Sketch of the Logos Model (Λ) of Creative Intelligence
B Within spacetime, recognition is the interpretation of “reality” spared in autism and the side of
the mind with which we lean on the known (clarity) in seeking pleasure and rejecting pain (desire).
Recognition follows the laws of sequence, finiteness, or completeness, the principle that seeks
perfect control and rejects imperfect control.
B Within metaspace, the world of fantasy impaired in autism, understanding is the side of the mind
that displays a divided attention (insight) and intention (strategy). Understanding follows the laws of
simultaneity, infinity, incompleteness, or less-than-perfect control, the principle that plays between
perfect and imperfect control—or 1 and 0—because it is both at the same time.
B Creation comes about when we enter doubt (seeing) and choose among mutually exclusive
responses (will) in a way that will renew our reality.
Paradoxically, we can neither stay home nor Within recognition—the autistic side of the
stay away from home. We are doomed if we stay too mind—I call clarity (figure 2) the attention with
long in the clear solidity of spacetime (autism), and which we believe in the legitimate existence—as
we are doomed if we stay too long in the foggy skies opposed to the illegitimate existence or
of the metaspace in which we court madness. As “nonexistence” (nonrecognition)—of what we
unreal as this may seem, creative people dwell observed, observe, or will observe about the self (as
neither on land nor in the sky. proper self shows) or about the other (as Zaitchik
shows).
To put it in a nutshell, we grow when we are Clarity’s close associate, the autistic intention I
always here and now (sequence) and nowhere call desire, will use recognized perceptual or
and everywhere at the same time (simultaneity). conceptual stimuli in order to seek pleasure and
The relationship between the two sides of the avoid pain. Autistics know what they desire and
creative mind is outlined in figure 2. desire what they know. For example, when my son
asks me for water, he knows exactly what (clarity) he
In Λ I call recognition the aspect of wants (desire). Hence, he neither doubts nor
consciousness that remains intact in autism. Within chooses.
spacetime, recognition grows under the influence of
eight laws grouped under the innate principle I Creative choice is possible only when we reach a
denominated sequence (order as opposed to crossroads in which we look simultaneously at
chaos). different and mutually exclusive alternatives. I call
understanding the aspect of the self that knows
In the previous chapters, we discussed the first how to enter and exit a crossroads. Through
two laws of sequence: understanding we re-create reality in two steps: first,
we challenge it with competing propositions
1. nothing can lie in separate, mismatched, (entering the crossroads); and, second, under the
or opposite worlds at the same time (no light of simultaneity, we choose (exiting the
divergence), and crossroads) among the ideas generated in the
confrontation in a way that may co-create the world
2. separate worlds cannot share the same with others.
space at the same time (no convergence). Within metaspace (the simultaneous emptiness
and plenitude that I have called the world between 1
The laws of sequence allow us to conserve and 0), understanding fosters the growth of the self
spacetime, or the legitimate, perfect, and by virtue of eight laws grouped under a principle
unchanging world of names. In a patriarchal society, called simultaneity, infinity, incompleteness, or
for example, a child conceived outside the family— less-than-perfect control (Cassella, 1997, 2000,
that is, in imperfect control or 2002a, 2002b).
nonrecognition—is a bastard who cannot be I call this principle simultaneity because through
given a legitimate name; hence, in a way, he or she it we never move from here to there, but “lie,” “are,”
does not “exist.” (See the third column in figure 1, p. and “exist” in both extremes and between them at
14.) once; I also call it infinity, for between here and
there we may find infinite ways of interpreting reality truth, the check is both good and bad; the friend may
(for example, the infinities between 0 and 1 [Devlin, be a dangerous alien in disguise; and the sun and
2000]); further, I call it incompleteness because the earth turn around each other.
creativity and life can be had only as long as there
are mysteries ahead of us; and I call it less-than- Within metaspace, our understanding is attuned
perfect control because sharing control with the to both being and nonbeing through a divided
other entails embracing control and no control modality of attention I call insight (see figure 2).
simultaneously. Here and there, everywhere and nowhere, insight
allows us to listen to the dance of competition and
We already discussed the first two laws of cooperation of seemingly incompatible stimuli.
simultaneity: (Insight, theory of mind, or the capacity to detect a
crossroads or disjunctive is, properly speaking, the
1. anything can stay or “lie” in separate, aspect of creative intelligence impaired in autism.)
mismatched, or opposite worlds at the same
time (ubiquity or divergence), and Looking at the play of dissonance and harmony
seen by insight, strategy, the planning aspect of
2. separate worlds may share the same space understanding, considers schemes and actions that
at the same time (convergence). in their novelty run counter to known procedures.
Metaspace is more than unlimited freedom (a Insight (our many-sided attention) and strategy
blank check by which “anything goes”), nothingness (our all-around intention) help each other in the
(a void check in which “nothing goes”), or a fake (a world of simultaneity until we land “back” in a
bad check that sows destructive feelings). renovated reality.
Metaspace is both the good check (namely, the Under the guidance of insight and strategy, then,
known: being, legitimacy, or recognition) and the I invite Honest John to place his check in an escrow
blank, void, or bad check (namely, the unknown: account before I transfer the title of my home to him;
nonbeing, illegitimacy, or nonrecognition) at the ask the “friend” who visits me about the health of his
same time. or her great-grandmother, who I know died ten years
Autistics cannot think of metaspace, in which ago; and decide to analyze astronomical data with
infinity courts being and nonbeing simultaneously. the hope of finding out what revolves around what.
Within the only world that autistics perceive and
conceive of, namely spacetime, I gladly accept the When we place control in opposition to no
check that Honest John gives me as payment for the control (through recognition), the self and its grip
house I am selling him; I open my door to the person over reality diminish over time. By contrast, when we
I assume is a friend; and I believe that the sun harmonize control with no control (through
revolves around the earth. By contrast, in understanding), the self and its control over reality
metaspace I cannot be sure that the check I am grow over time. However, if we use understanding to
given is a good check, that the person to whom I heighten recognition’s desire for total control, we
open my door is a friend, and that the sun revolves may end up embracing no control (nonrecognition).
around the earth. At that moment, until I land on the
To the rigid—and even deceitful—person difficult return to a familiar and unchanging world
centered in the spacetime of the illusion of extinguishes creativity. I call such a bridge seeing
perfection, immortality, and omnipotence, (see figure 2). Seeing begins with recognition, the
there are no companions to share control with, no side of consciousness spared in autism, and ends
doubt, and no hope; there are only objects, with understanding, the aspect of consciousness
quantities, measurements, and routines that will impaired in autism. In other words, seeing begins in
control us if we fail to control them. Whatever apex reality and ends in fantasy. It belongs to the realms
our power may reach in a dog-eat-dog world, of both recognition and understanding. However,
however, eventually we are bound to find a from the point of view of recognition, seeing cannot
competitor who will eat us. exist, for a bridge that goes everywhere and
nowhere is meaningless.
Fixed in spacetime, autistics cannot use The insightful reader may observe that seeing is
metaspace, for good or ill. Simply, they trust reliable no different from insight; the observation is fitting.
schemes (being) and reject unreliable ones Yet, by positing seeing as a bridge between clarity
(nonbeing). Autistics cannot fathom the magic of and insight I stress that without clarity as a starting
doubt and hope that guides us when conferring point, the shores of insight cannot be reached.
legitimacy to new patterns or removing legitimacy Indeed, by passing Zaitchik and failing false
from obsolete patterns without leaning too heavily on belief, autistics prove that recognition is necessary
trial and error. Hence, they will always look but insufficient for entering understanding (Cassella,
hopelessly at the chasm between being and 2000). Autistics are not alone in missing the bridge
nonbeing. of seeing. People who trust too much to literal
From the standpoint of autistic recognition, there interpretations, logic, operational definitions, and
is no bridge between legitimate and illegitimate measurements miss the splendor of the rainbow that
existence; that is, recognition cannot consciously leads one to the land of enchantment. How can that
acknowledge understanding. Recognition pays be?
attention only to what can be controlled or cannot be As Peter Pan’s tale shows, the bridge of seeing
controlled at all. Consequently, if we invited autistics appears only when we believe that the unsettling
to look at doubt, we would force them to abandon emptiness of the skies of metaspace is as real and
the only world in which they live! Autistics see known necessary as the solidity of down-to-earth
movements from here to there (clarity); they spacetime.
cannot see (insight) the here and there at the same
time, a terrifying and wondrous magic that arises Although entering metaspace is accompanied by
when we embrace doubt or virtual denial. the fear of losing sight of home (our return is not
Autistics are not totally wrong. By definition, once guaranteed at all), there are ways to return to a
we enter the simultaneity of metaspace, there is no renovated reality. Indeed, the experimental subjects
way to go back to the exact reality we left behind, of my sample who passed false-belief (the capacity
considering that understanding is summoned with for insight) and proper self (the capacity for clarity)
the sole purpose of changing reality. Thus, the proved that in some cognitive operations (the use of
bridge that connects spacetime to metaspace is a pronouns, for example) we can go and come back
one-way bridge (Cassella, 2002b), because the
between recognition and understanding without us whether to take the path that leads to the balance
even noticing the magic of our act. of the self with itself and of the self with the other. I
The essential return from fantasy to reality call that balance third attention, in the footsteps of
occurs when we cross a different bridge, a creative Carlos Castaneda (1981; 1987), the anthropologist
and artful state of consciousness I call will. Will who followed the teaching of the mystic Don Juan.
shows that understanding changes recognition in
order to keep it “invariant” (Cassella, 2000), a The third attention arrives when we are able to
tenet as absurd as growth. balance clarity with desire (within recognition),
Growth—physical and mental—occurs when we insight with strategy (within understanding),
“return” to the self and the world we left behind with clarity with insight (within seeing), strategy with
something new, a gift facilitated by will. desire (within will), and, finally, seeing with will and
Will too is a one-way bridge. Indeed, recognition with understanding (see the drawing
recognition—behaving as any good guardian would on the previous page).
in trying to protect the integrity of whatever is placed
in its custody⎯cannot send the gift back to an Since babies show that balance is innate (see
understanding designed to deny reality (Cassella, chapter 6), I offer just a few comments on the pitfalls
2002b). Thus, recognition must keep the gift of walking away from balance.
unchanged—the objective behind conservation— I start with the premise that the issue of ultimate
unless evidence shows that it has become obsolete balance does not touch the consciousness of the
or that it never was a good choice. autistic person. Paradoxically, their inability for
Again, the quick reader might add that will conceiving of balance makes them the best teachers
coincides with strategy; and, again, the remark in the world.
would be appropriate. With will I just emphasize the In what concerns us, we turn our back on
irreversible act of volition through which we choose balance if we use the awesome power of
the refreshed identity and world we want to return to. understanding to mercilessly exploit the world
around us. We can grow only by polishing the self,
Because both recognition and understanding are bit by bit, through continuous encounters with the
useless when separated, sustainable growth results only will that we cannot control at will: the will of the
only from the balance of the laws of sequence with other. Every confrontation may be taken as a
the laws of simultaneity. Their combined works allow crossroads in which we face life and death
recognition and understanding to grow. simultaneously. Life is the possibility to co-create the
Growth arrives when we value recognition as world with others by first welcoming and then
both the port from which we may enter the ocean of overcoming disagreement, and death is the creeping
understanding, via seeing, and the new harbor to erosion that leads to the eventual disintegration of
which we may arrive, via will. the self in love only with itself (nonrecognition; see
the area beyond the outer circle in figure 5, p. 46).
We cannot sustain growth, however, unless we
become aware of the possibility of balancing The desire for total control presses us to
recognition with understanding in our selves and eliminate the obstacles that stand in our way. Under
in the system we belong to. Once we do, it is up to
such a strategy, what is good news for us is bad Yet, the growth of a sober or social creative
news for whomever or whatever we intend to control. intelligence may be encouraged in two ways:
Logos suggests that the abandonment or,
worse, enslavement or mistreatment of 1. spreading an awareness of the innate magic of
understanding with the views and desires that simultaneity in all of us; and
recognition adores is difficult to undo when this
occurs in the preschool years. As with an avalanche 2. providing children with a creative education in
that begins with a pebble, a maladaptive the family before they enter formal schooling.
interpretation of reality early in life—the
consequence of an inhumane education—may grow The second action cannot come about without
into a serious mental imbalance in adolescence or the first one, which is extremely challenging.
early adulthood. To begin with, whatever takes place in
metaspace remains invisible; and, to our recognition,
For example, consider the worldview that what is invisible does not exist. Rigid minds, for
fundamentalists preach (either you are with me or example, cannot think of the social magic inherent in
you are against me), which is rooted in resentment, simultaneity, although they use its power when they
fear, and a desire for absolute power. lie and double-cross others in order to pursue their
Fundamentalists’ grievances would not diminish unilateral ends.
even if their demands were met in full. People in As a matter of fact, because of its invisibility,
search of total control will never accept that they simultaneity does not even approach what people
have received what they are entitled to, and they will consider a real “thing,” although it is more real than
never be grateful for what they have received from anything we may see.
others. The complete submission of the other, the
utmost exploitation of the resources of the other, or Simultaneity is difficult to handle because it plays
the destruction of the other is the only outcome that with truth and falsity at the same time. That is why it
will satisfy people who have never learned how to is fond of communicating with us by means of
create by sharing control with another who riddles.
disagrees. Indeed, as long as we find people who Riddles are strange because their solution rests
agree with our views, we are meeting not the other on an anomaly. For example, in a Greek play,
but the self. Oedipus was made king of Thebes, instead of being
put to death, because he solved the riddle of the
The capacity for meeting the other is either Sphinx (an anomalous being with the head and
bolstered or weakened in infancy. breasts of a woman, the body of a lion, and wings):
Teaching children how to abandon or to misuse “what has four legs in the morning, two at noon, and
their innate bias for the social use of creativity is not three at night?”
difficult. Too many people emphasize beyond
measure their desire for total and immediate When we are presented with a riddle at the
control—the consequence of their fear of failure and crossroads of life and death, our anxiety (while we
lack of self-esteem. search for its solution) originates from the fact that
knowledge, observation, and measurements are
useless. Because the truth “lies” behind visible We respond to the serendipitous obstacles that
reality, if we limit our search to either accepting or infinity places in our way when we appreciate the
rejecting literal meanings, we cannot solve the clash of opposite interpretations of the same text,
riddle. The answer Oedipus gave the Sphinx—that it sign, or event, which is equivalent to visiting widely
is man who crawls on four limbs in infancy, learns to divergent contexts simultaneously. When we realize
walk on two legs, and leans on a stick—the third that good fortune hides behind disgrace, we are free
leg—in old age, shows that we may solve a riddle to go (via seeing) toward the torment of doubt in
when we simultaneously accept and reject its literal metaspace. Hopefully, we may come back to
meaning. spacetime (via will).
Logos suggests that our propensity for riddles Again, we refresh our world when we tackle the
reflects the nature of the infinity that re-creates the riddles that infinity places on our path. As with
universe. But how can anyone trust a force that Oedipus, every riddle becomes a crossroads of life
creates by “lying” behind visible space and time? and death. If we are successful, we and our world
Indeed, it is not easy to accept that simultaneity, (spacetime) will grow. Failure, however, brings the
the invisible infinity that “lies” behind reality, tells us disintegration of the self.
the truth through double meanings. And what might In more detail, right choices take us “back” to a
be even more difficult to accept is that its control renewed recognition, whereas wrong choices may
entails less than perfection. In Λ, less than send us into the hellish embrace of nonrecognition.
perfection responds to the view that besides Paradoxically, recognition—the autistic side of the
encompassing perfection simultaneity also self—does not know of the “existence” of
encompasses its opposite, imperfection. Here is understanding, the artistic side of the self, although
another reason for calling infinity incompleteness: normal persons may use their creative power for
how can we limit simultaneity to completeness if it good or for bad in many ways. This suggests that we
includes nonreality or nothingness at the same time? may jump from recognition to nonrecognition
instantaneously, without noticing the precipice into
The incompleteness of simultaneity has many which we are jumping.
implications. One of them is that this principle is
meaningless without its finite complement, In the next chapter we will see that only when we
sequence. In the same way, our understanding is learn how to use seeing and will properly in early
meaningless without its complement—recognition life do we reach the capacity for resurrection that
as opposed to nonrecognition (the area beyond rejuvenates the self and the other.
the outer circumference). Furthermore, recognition
grows only by accepting the gifts found by
understanding in the crossroads of infinity.
CHAPTER 6 From Walking to Crawling

***************************************************************
The harmony between the reality guarded by The pretending girl, an innate actress, is neither
recognition and the fantasy dreamed by autistic nor mad in spacetime, the irreversible yet
understanding is reflected in the pretend play that repetitive “reality” perceived by recognition, because
children engage in by the end of the second year. she is both autistic and mad in metaspace, the realm
Autistics cannot engage in symbolic play of reversible reality or fantasy cherished by
because the one-way bridges of seeing and will understanding. Her feat, which autistics cannot
remain invisible to them. By contrast, in normal imitate, consists of using her fantasy to deny
children who have families that support the balance without actually denying the world guarded by her
between sequence and simultaneity, the bridges recognition consciousness. By contrast, to autistics
appear to them while they are daydreaming. and to any living being dazzled by the visibility of a
sequential world, it is not possible for a person to be
For example, let us imagine a girl who sings to young (the girl), very young (her doll), and older (her
her doll the same song that her mother has sung to mother) at the same time, or for an object (the doll)
her the night before. Through her spontaneous to be alive and dead simultaneously.
pretense, the little girl becomes her mother and her After virtually “leaving behind” the world of
doll at the same time. This means that the child autistic sequence via seeing, the girl reaches
“exists” in three separate worlds simultaneously: understanding in metaspace, the realm in which she
in her doll, in her mother, and in her self. Her act is an adult and the doll is alive. If the girl loses her
violates reality; therefore the little girl’s imitation of anchor in spacetime, she will wander forever in the
her mother is not totally rooted in the autistic side of fog of schizoid worlds; and if she never leaves the
her mind. (Recall that autistics cannot violate reality.) world of sequence, she will lapse into autisticlike
behavior.
If she were autistic, the child would be unable to
enter the marvelous and terrifying labyrinth of
simultaneity because she would not accept that she,
her doll, and her mother could share the same space
at the same time.
After finishing her pretend play, the little girl
“comes back” to the reality guarded by her
recognition, which suggests that she never ceased
to be herself. However, her astonishing experience
changes her world forever, since, through seeing,
what is reality today will be left behind irrevocably,
and, through will, what is fantasy today will become
*
reality tomorrow. That is, “pre-tending” to be a the precursor of Zaitchik, which, around the age of
†
mother (seeing) “transforms” (will) the girl into a four to five years, proves the onset of the capacity
caring potential mother. for representing the identity of the other over time.
Unlike children with Down’s syndrome, autistics Likewise, at the age of two years mirror self-
cannot easily engage in pretend play (Baron-Cohen, recognition shows the capacity for representing the
1987; Bernabei, Camaioni & Levi, 1999; Gould, identity of the self in the present. The task is the
1986; Leslie & Roth, 1993; Rutheford & Rogers, precursor of proper self, which, around the age of
2003; Ungerer & Sigman, 1981; Wing, Gould, Yates four to five years, taps into the ability to represent
& Brierley, 1977) because, according to my the identity of the self over time. For example, if we
research, they lack the principle of simultaneity and could not recognize who we were when standing in
the bridges I call seeing and will (see chapter 5). front of a mirror one morning (recognition in the
However, they pass (Gergely, 1994) level VI present), we would not remember our decision to
object invisible displacement (Piaget, 1983), visit our mother-in-law that afternoon (recognition
also administered at the age of two years. (In this over time).
test, small children search for an object that is
moved without their knowledge.) In mirror self-recognition, a red spot is placed
Further, autistics surpass their Down’s controls surreptitiously on the subject’s forehead. Upon
in invisible displacement and in mirror self- seeing his or her image in a mirror, the child touches
recognition (Gopnik & Meltzoff, 1994). The latter the spot (Asendorpf & Baudonniere, 1993). About
test, as its name suggests, shows the onset of the half of chimpanzees raised in captivity pass this test
capacity to represent the self around the age of two at the age of four to five years but do not pass tasks
‡
years. as complex as proper self.
Because Berthental and Fisher (1978) found a Invisible displacement and mirror self-
correlation between mirror self-recognition and recognition suggest that the desire for conserving
invisible displacement, we may conclude that the our identities—and our sanity with it—presses us to
abilities displayed in both tests belong to the process what we perceive and conceive through
cognitive system spared in autism: recognition schemes that rest on legitimate causation.
(Cassella, 1997). Hence, they rely, in my view, on
the laws I grouped under the principle of sequence. In what concerns the capacity for linking
concepts within legitimate schemes (for example,
Invisible displacement, passed at the age of two remembering whom we lent money to, when, and
years, reflects the ability to represent the identity of how much), we surpass all other animals. (The most
the other in the present. This means that the task is intelligent nonhumans [for example, chimpanzees
and orangutans] can link a concept with a
* perception, but, as far as I know, animals other than
According to the philosopher Martin Heidegger, “pre-tending”
means denying the self in order to meet the other (critique the human being cannot link a concept with another
offered by Dr. Nicolás Barros of UNESR [Caracas] in 1998).
†
To “trans-form” is to renovate the form cherished by ‡
recognition. Conversation with Dr. Daniel Povinelli in 1996.
concept; otherwise, animals would write computer It is fun because the story invites us to enter a
software manuals.) nonlogical or unreal reality, in which we affirm and
deny something at the same time—a feat that I
Yet our real advantage over all other creatures emphasize with the phrase “is and is not” or “being
is the ability to process information in parallel or and nonbeing.” That is equivalent to standing
simultaneously by violating known reality. That simultaneously in separate worlds at the same
magic comes when we establish a new link between time—in the context of boxing and in the context of
representations, perceptions, or emotions. (By ethics.
themselves, nonhuman animals cannot, before the To sum up, to be and not to be and to be in
fact, easily change inherited or acquired schemes.) more than one place at the same time are the
For example, suppose that instead of asking same thing.
firemen to put out a fire, I asked them to burn the
wood behind my house under controlled conditions Let us continue with the absurd, albeit magical,
(with the idea of creating a buffer zone). My request, reasoning that autistics lack. In the tale Beauty and
if it were a new idea to me, would reflect a manner of the Beast, Beauty is not complaining when she tells
information processing that violates familiar reality— her father, “Dad, my sweetheart is a beast!”
firemen who set fire to woods instead of putting fires However, by understanding that behind the
out—an anomalous feat, which autistics cannot appearance of the beast “lies” a tender soul, she
comprehend. violates reality, since she meets her beloved in
separate worlds at the same time, in the world of
Our ability to violate reality allows us to beasts and in the world of creative human beings.
understand the tragicomedies that constitute social And we too are in separate worlds at the same
life. For example, after knocking out his opponent, a time if we get both the literal sense and the
boxer says, “To give is better than to receive.” metaphor.
This sentence can have meaning in Since they are unable to stand in two places at
independent, even opposite, contexts: boxing and the same time, autistics cannot violate reality. Such
ethics. In fact, the phrase “To give is better than to a conclusion is proved by the fact that autistics who
receive” is normally used in the context of helping do not suffer from mental retardation outperform
others without asking for anything in return. their controls in Zaitchik but fail false belief (which,
Furthermore, within ethics, the meaning of the like Zaitchik, is administered to four-year-olds) and
sentence is an inversion of the interpretation even pretend play (an ability that children acquire at
imposed by the boxer; that is, the most commonly the age of two years).
accepted meaning (is), which lies within ethics, This puzzling fact can be easily explained. High-
opposes the particular meaning (is not) imposed by functioning autistics fall behind two-year-olds in
the real situation at hand—boxing. pretend play because they lack the capacity to
We are so used to automatically ascribe process information in parallel. Astonishingly, the
meaning to the sentence in matters of ethics that the lack of the capacity for simultaneity is also the
story becomes a pun. We laugh when we hear it reason why they beat their controls in invisible
because the competition of opposite contexts is fun.
displacement at the age of two years and in Zaitchik do not share the same space at the same time
at the age of four to five years. and we exist only in one place at a time.
To cut a long story short, in autistics, and not in
the normal child, the sequential mode of information Recognition is the innate mode of
processing required by invisible displacement and consciousness that guards the identity of
Zaitchik is not disturbed by the parallel information “permanent” entities once they have been created
processing driven by simultaneity. by understanding.
Although Piaget (1983) detected the arrival of To validate the hypothesis that recognition and
representation in two-year-olds through level VI understanding are innate, I now present early
object invisible displacement, this pioneer of human development in reverse chronological order, from the
development did not discriminate between parallel age of one year to birth. Reversibility matches the
and sequential information processing. Because wit of Martin Heidegger, who suggested that we
normal children combine sequential with parallel grow only when we take things backwards (Cassella,
information processing, the two modes of 2000, p. 207).
intelligence or the two facets of our minds can be
discerned only by testing autistics (who are limited to By the end of their first year of life, normal
processing information sequentially). children acquire joint attention abilities
(Butterworth, 1995). In joint attention, before
In mirror self-recognition children touch the spot on accepting a new scheme, children compare their
their forehead because they recognize that the vision of reality with the view of another person
image in the mirror corresponds to the unique regarding an intriguing object that both can see. In
identity they will own throughout any sequence—an the comparison, children usually point to the object
identity that they cannot give away if they wish to with the index finger (proto-declarative pointing
remain sane. By contrast, in the pretend play that [Baron-Cohen, 1995])⎯a behavior that only normal
autistics cannot fathom, the alternative of having human beings display⎯looking alternatively at the
different identities at the same time or in parallel object and at the person they are dialoguing with.
is equivalent to “existing” in separate worlds at
once. Autistic children rarely point spontaneously with
their index finger in order to differentiate first and
Again, pretend play and the ubiquity or integrate later their point of view with the point of
simultaneity it prizes court autism (or permanence) view of another person. In cases where they do
and madness (or impermanence) at the same time express an unambiguous desire by pointing, it is
(Cassella, 2002b). called proto-imperative (Baron-Cohen, 1995)
I emphasize once more that we should not stay because their attention is focused exclusively on
too long in the realm of fantasy dreamed of by what they perceive and wish to control perfectly,
understanding. The moment comes when we had without simultaneously worrying about the thoughts
better wake up, albeit for a time, in the hard reality of and desires of others.
the world of recognition in which separate worlds
Rimland (1964) calls proto-declarative pointing is already present in normal children by the age of
triangulation, emphasizing that we arrive at four months or earlier.
valuable novelty only by crossing different angles or
points of view on the same issue. In Λ, with the For example, the capacity for spreading our
onset of triangulation, the normal child realizes that attention in the infinity enclosed within opposite limits
the novelty arrived at by integrating independent is manifested especially by the four-month-old boy
views, before it is found, “lies” in several places at who realizes that his feelings differ from and even
the same time, even though, once created (through oppose his mother’s in any given situation. The baby
will) and accepted by recognition it cannot lie in knows that his mother has understood his different
more than one place simultaneously. emotions, and he also knows that she knows that he
knows that she has understood him (Grice, 1957).
Logos suggests that the child and his mother see
The capacity for shifting attention from the opposite emotions at once; that is, they are capable
self to the other and back or for dividing the of placing themselves in clashing worlds at the
attention between the self and the other same time.
simultaneously creates empathy between a three-
month-old baby and his or her mother (Trevarthen,
1993).
Thus empathy arises when the emotional M. Johnson (1997) observed that, starting at the
intelligence of babies is driven by simultaneity or age of three to four months, babies can shift their
less-than-perfect control (Cassella, 2000). Notice attention when anticipating a counterstimulus on the
that real empathy is not uncreative imitation—as opposite side of their peripheral visual field.
when a baby cries because he or she hears other In addition, Watson (1994) proved that from the
babies crying—but an integration of clashing third or fourth month on normal babies are biased
feelings. Indeed, a mother cannot calm her troubled toward situations that are neither totally predictable
child if she becomes upset, nor can she cry in order (recall that total predictability is equivalent to
to console her crying baby. Because she cannot assuming a probability of existence [p] that equals 1)
even laugh at her child’s weeping, we must conclude nor totally unpredictable (p = 0). According to
that in the paradoxical metaspace that welcomes Watson, three- to four-month-olds show sensitivity
their creative minds she and her baby are capable for conditional probability or less-than-perfect
of laughing and weeping at the same time. contingency (less-than-perfect control in Λ).
Indeed, when we are able to laugh and weep at In Logos’s wording, they are able to divide their
the same time in metaspace, we can cry openly attention in order to see the cluster of values
while we laugh inside or vice versa, as a real actress between 0 and 1, which is equivalent to existing
may easily do. simultaneously in the infinity between 0 and 1
Normal babies may do that too, whereas at no (the center column in figure 1, p. 13) or to seeing 0
age can autistics tease their mother by pretending to and 1 at the same time.
be sad when they are happy or vice versa. I By contrast, recognition—the autistic side of the
conclude, then, that the capacity for denying reality mind—looks at 1 (the first column) and opposes 0 or
nonrecognition (the third column in figure 1). We
could also make nonrecognition 1 and recognition 0. center does not allow the division of attention
What matters is that recognition can be either 1 or 0, between mutually exclusive stimuli.)
but not both at the same time. In fact, 1 and 0 at the Consequently, Λ suggests that four-month-olds
same time is understanding. Recognition cannot at risk of autism will not pass the attention-shifting
encompass 0 and 1 simultaneously, for in its view, tests devised by Johnson and Watson.
the first and the third column in figure 1 cannot
“exist” simultaneously. In relation to shifting attention between opposite
In sum, we may conclude that both Johnson and stimuli, Courchesne et al. (1994) have observed that
Watson, each in his own way, have validated the autistics are slower than their normal controls in
early onset of understanding, the creator of any cross-modal shifts (for example, shifting from stimuli
mode of probability distribution between certainty perceived through sight to stimuli perceived through
and uncertainty. sound). Courchesne et al. have linked these
limitations among autistics to malformations in the
Now, Bauman and Kemper (1994), after cerebellum. Further, they suggested that the
studying the anatomy of the brains of autistic malfunction might be linked to an abnormal
persons, have proved that some of the effects of decrease in the number of the Purkinje cells in the
genetic autism are in place by the thirtieth to thirty- cerebellar cortex, an anatomical characteristic that
second week of gestation. Bauman and Kemper point out.
Piaget proposed that the root of creative
intelligence, or “montage héréditaire,” is innate. In my view (Cassella 1997, 2002a) of Ito’s
Johnson’s, Watson’s, and Bauman and Kemper’s (1993) direct and inverse cerebellar dynamics, the
research also suggests that understanding is innate. damage is not limited to a decrease in the number of
Recognition too must be innate, since, as Watson Purkinje cells but extends to a faulty cerebrum-
observed, normal children do not display the cerebellum circuitry. According to my research, the
capacity for conditional probability, or less-than- neurocircuitry of the creative intelligence impaired in
perfect control, unless they first anchor their autism (figure 3) is not limited to a module, but is
attention in perfect control. present in most structures and substructures of the
normal brain.
Further, Johnson found that in the first three
months of life children focus their attention only on At the very least, it involves the Purkinje cells,
the stimulus they perceive in their central visual the deep cerebellar nuclei, the pontine nuclei, the
field, which I link to sequence. reticular formation, the hypothalamus and medulla,
The fact that the lateral visual field, which I link the locus ceruleus, the limbic system, the
to simultaneity, does not mature until the fourth ventrolateral thalamus, the midbrain red nucleus, the
month explains why the presence of understanding lateral visual field, the multimodal cortex, the
has not been detected consistently before the end of cingulate gyrus, and the parahippocampal gyrus.
the third month. (In the light of Λ, the central visual
field is necessary but insufficient for testing the Ito observed templates of two dynamics within
capacity for shifting attention. The reason is that the the organization of the Purkinje cells, a direct one
lack of differentiation between left and right in any in the paravermis linked to the interpositus nucleus
and an inverse one in the cerebellar hemisphere understand the meanings of the templates and their
linked to the ventrolateral dentate nucleus (which is relationship. As is apparent from what I have
enormous in humans in comparison with other discussed so far, the relationship between the
primates). autistic and the artistic side of the mind is, indeed,
In addition to noticing that within inverse bizarre.
dynamics the cerebellum controls in a feed-forward,
creative mode, Ito reported that he could not fully .
F r o n ta l, p o s te rio r -p a rie ta l,
te m p o r a l,
P r e fr o n ta l, c in g u la te g y ru s
o c c ip it a l
(tr im o d a l a tte n tio n ),
to p a r ie t a l,
p a ra h ip p o c a m p a l g y r u s
d o r s a l s tr e a m
o f th e la te r a l
M e ta s p a c e
v is u a l fie ld c ir c u itr y
L im b ic s y s te m
P o n tin e n u c le i ,
r e tic u la r Red
fo r m a tio n T h a la m u s : V L n u c le u s
M ossy-
O liv a r y e x c ita to r y N e o c e r e b e lla r
h e m is p h e r e s ,
n u c le i C lim b in g -
E x c ita to ry v e r m is
In h ib ito r y
C lim b in g - C e r e b e lla r d e e p
E x c ita to ry n u c le i
L o c u s c e ru le u s
Figure 3. A Sketch of the Circuitry of Creative Intelligence (impaired in autism)
The cognitive dynamics corresponding to understanding, built on the relationship between the Purkinje
cells and the deep nuclei in the cerebellum, is linked to the whole brain, particularly to the lateral visual
field (in view of the opposition right-left). The damage to the autistic brain is pervasive or systemic.
Since these dynamics are linked to the whole

brain (figure 4) (Cassella, 2002a), we must conclude
What Ito called direct dynamics corresponds that the neurocircuitry corresponding to the actor or
to sequence-recognition in Logos, and what he actress in all of us, namely understanding, is also
called inverse dynamics corresponds to systemic and that the damage in genetic autism is
simultaneity-understanding. systemic, although individual processors might
become faulty before birth, at birth, or later.
That is why understanding autism is recognition cannot accept opposite stimuli at the
understanding the mind. Autism challenges us to same time. Consequently, one of them is neglected.
uncover the roots of the dance of two dissimilar Only understanding is capable of dealing with
dynamics that drive our minds and every component equality in difference. Thus, unilateral neglect points
of our bodies. at a dysfunction of the neurocircuitry corresponding
For example, Rafal and Robertson (1995) to understanding in the lateral visual field.
reported the characteristics of unilateral neglect in
patients who had suffered a large stroke in a Back to Courchesne et al. The slow speed they
cerebral hemisphere. These patients could see attributed to their autistic patients in the cross-modal
objects presented simultaneously on both sides of attention shifts might respond also to a faulty
their visual fields as long as the objects were operation of the dynamics of simultaneity, which, as
different. In more detail, a male patient with a lesion unilateral neglect shows, is strongly involved with the
in the left hemisphere could see a spoon presented lateral vision field. In my view, then, we might be
on his right and a fork on his left. dealing not with a slower thought process, as
Courchesne et al. seem to suggest, but with a more
However, when the two objects belonged to the general impairment of simultaneous thought.
same category—for example, two spoons—the The critical reader may ask how autistics are
patient “neglected” or stopped seeing the spoon on able to shift their attention at all, albeit slowly, if they
his right, although he did see it when there was lack simultaneity.
nothing or a fork to his left. The answer is that, by design, the use of
simultaneity guarantees not immediate and total
Logos suggests that the patient followed only victory but a degree of success that, in the long run,
the rule of no divergence, by which nothing can allows us to beat the odds. To a normal child, finding
stay in separate, mismatched, or even an unfamiliar use for an object is an easy step; to an
opposite worlds simultaneously. In Logos’s view, autistic it is an irrational and difficult decision. We
patients suffering unilateral neglect have lost one of make fewer mistakes and we learn from trial and
many applications of the capacity to detect that error faster, deeper, and wider than autistics.
anything may stay or “lie” in separate, Besides, to the creative mind, every
mismatched, or opposite worlds at once spontaneous mistake and every unintended
(divergence) (Cassella, 2000, 2002a). Thus, Logos disgrace may yield a treasure.
helps predict that patients with unilateral neglect will
see similar objects only when they are located on Thus, the best learning process couples the
the same side of their lateral vision field or in their sixth sense provided by understanding with the
central visual field. Indeed, once the two spoons are reality provided by recognition through legitimate
separated and sent to mutually exclusive perception and rigid logic. In fact, creative insight
universes—as demanded by the chasm between the and strategy without a foothold in reality are as
right and the left side—they cease to be an dangerous as knowledge (clarity) and need (desire)
assembly of clones and become equal yet opposite are without a foothold in fantasy.
interpretations of the same expression. By itself,
We must learn to link movement in space and recognition and the infinite speed seen by
time with instantaneous “movement” in metaspace. understanding beyond space and time (metaspace)
The two domains differ essentially in the way we permits the exploration of key aspects of the theory
view space and time—that is, speed. of general relativity and quantum physics.
As we will see in the next chapter, the difference
between finite speed in the space and time seen by
CHAPTER 7 The Universe and the Mind

***************************************************************
According to Logos, both Newtonian mechanics and the limit of the speed of light in visible reality.
Einstein’s theory of special relativity rest on the Undoubtedly, if he could, Einstein would say “I told
principle of sequence, in which we recognize the you so!”
movement inherent in the perception of a finite In Minority Report three seers, by integrating
speed. their keen insights, are able to detect crimes that will
By contrast, simultaneity or infinity inheres in the be committed in the future. Their foresight is
infinite speed that can be had in metaspace⎯which comparable to the view we may have of the river of
is equivalent to no speed and no movement, in a no return. However, there is a small but significant
way, because the intent to move is to arrive. difference: the seers decide to interfere with life’s
Infinite speed cannot be had in visible reality natural flow—a dangerous violation of reality. In fact,
without falling into paradox. if they see a bad turn downriver, they inform the
precrime police. Because their outlandish feat leads
For example, let us begin by equating a person’s to the arrest of the criminals-to-be, merely the intent
life to a river that crosses an Alpine range before to commit a crime is punished as if the crime has
emptying into a lake. Also, imagine that we stand at already been committed.
the top of the highest mountain of the range, and Minority Report suggests that an effect (the
that from there we can see the entire river, from its “committed” crime that society wishes to prevent) is
source to its mouth. exchanged with or precedes its cause (the “criminal”
who is not allowed to commit it). Because they are
Our position allows us to highlight two crucial punished for a crime that they have and have not
points: committed, defendants and their judges stand in the
past and in the future at once. In brief, both the
1. We can focus our attention on any event in the characters in the movie and the spectators who
life under our scrutiny because we can see the follow its story travel faster than light.
entire river of facts, that is, all the facts at the
same time; and Though understanding “moves” instantaneously
through space and time, according to the theory of
2. the facts that we may see again and again are general relativity, reality can be had only at finite
conserved as they happened, happen, and will speeds. Indeed, if light had infinite speed, it would
happen because the impassable chasm that be found everywhere simultaneously, a condition
separates us from them does not allow us to that would make space, time, and stock markets
change them. We see, but we cannot touch; and vanish. Fortunately, our recognition is a responsible
if we could, we shouldn’t, for life can be had only and careful guardian of the laws of sequence in
as a trip on the river of no return. spacetime.
To better explain the point, I will review a movie Recall that in Zaitchik’s photo task Big Bird
about the amazing consequences of disrespecting follows Bert on the mat because in spacetime
†
separate worlds cannot lie on the same space human in his image, . . . male and female.
at the same time (no convergence). Similarly, (Genesis, 1:26-27; italics are mine)
within sequence, the photons in a ray of light must
Then the Lord God formed the human of the
follow one another at a finite speed.
humus of the soil. (Genesis, 2:7; italics are
However, in quantum electrodynamics—the mine)
branch of fundamental physics that studies the
dance of photons, which are without any mass (an The play of sequence and simultaneity in soil—a
aspect of energy), with mass-endowed electrons (an metaphor for matter—may be better understood by
aspect of matter)—speed limits are not always focusing on the massive dancing partner of the
welcome. For instance, R. Feynman’s (1985) photon: the electron.
equations imply that there are contexts in which The fact that photons have zero rest mass might
photons seem to move at infinite speed. Besides encourage their proclivity to meet in the same space
being everywhere, photons can share the same at the same time when they are not observed. By
space at the same time when light behaves as a contrast, mass-endowed electrons show less
wave (Feynman, 1985, pp. 111–112) (convergence flexibility.
in Λ). Indeed, Feynman recognized that polarized
electrons refuse to share the same space at the
The fact that photons obey both the laws of same time, a fact known as Pauli’s exclusion
sequence and the laws of simultaneity—as we may principle in quantum physics (no convergence in
do—leads to my conjecture that light and matter Λ). This mutual hatred is responsible for the fact that
follow the same systems dynamics that animates the we cannot cross walls when we are awake.
human mind, perhaps the one posited by Λ. Electrons are not alone in their autisticlike struggle
to conserve reality.
The idea is not new, of course.
Regarding quantum chromodynamics (the
And God said, “let there be light”: and there was branch of fundamental physics that studies force
light. (Genesis, 1:3)
and matter in the atomic nucleus), M. Murray Gell-
* Man (1994, p. 124) posited that all fermions (Fermi-
And God said, “let us make the human in our
Dirac particles: electrons, neutrinos, protons,
image by our likeness . . . And God created the
neutrons, quarks, their anti-particles, and so on)
obey the exclusion principle. In addition, he
stressed that all bosons (Bose-Einstein particles:
* photons, weak photons, gluons, and so on) obey
At this moment in creation, the word adam designates an
undifferentiated human being; the word does not mean man, nor what we may call the anti-exclusion principle (the
does it point to the proper name Adam (Alter, 1976). Clearly, law of convergence in Λ).
without a female, there could have been no male to speak of. In
my interpretation of Genesis, after God separates Eve (a We might be tempted to conclude that
metaphor for the flexible and creative side of the mind) from the
human mold, the residue acquires the name Adam (a metaphor †
for the rigid side of the mind). Because they were created from Since Genesis suggests that God’s nature “lies” in the
the same mold, femininity and masculinity are opposites and complementarity of opposites (for example, male and female),
complementary at the same time. If they were not opposites, the use of masculine pronouns in relation to the force of
they could not complement each other. creativity should be seen as a convenient artifice.
2. We exit the labyrinth through the one-way bridge

• Any force or energy field, which is a collection of of will.
bosons, according to Gell-Man, obeys the laws
of simultaneity, as our understanding does; and The second step may occur in one of three
ways: We may reach a new place in our home
• Matter, or a collection of fermions, obeys the universe, a new universe, or the nonreality in which
laws of sequence, as does our recognition. identity disintegrates. (I am not counting the option
of staying in the labyrinth forever.)
We have seen, however, that photons seemingly
driven by simultaneity follow the laws of sequence Abrupt and instantaneous travel is not limited to
when they are observed. Although they are centered the microcosm posited by quantum physics or to the
in sequence, would electrons follow the laws of metaspace viewed by the creative mind. It may also
simultaneity when they are not observed? That is take place on a galactic scale.
precisely what happens! Modern cosmology posits the existence of
Quantum electrodynamics states that when they unfathomable tunnels called wormholes, which defy
are not observed, electrons can be anywhere within the visible laws of space and time by instantly
a specific orbital, the space around the atomic connecting two different parts of the same universe
nucleus in which they are usually confined. In or two different universes (Barrow, 1994).
Logos’s terms, then, an electron courts competing
options of existence at the same time. This Through Λ, we may see a wormhole as a
conclusion is validated by the fact that they manifest combination of a “black hole,” the infinity into
the effects of interference (double dealing) when which everything goes irreversibly (seeing), and
they behave as waves (Icke, 1995, pp. 64–72). the inverse phenomenon, a “white hole” (Narlikar,
1996), the infinity from which everything comes
Furthermore, once in a while an electron may go back irreversibly (will).
overboard and jump unexpectedly (quantum jump) The hypothesis that both the human mind and
in no time (within metaspace) to another orbital—a the cosmos respond to the same laws leads me to
feat that definitely calls for the infinite “speed” conjecture that black holes and white holes are
provided by the law of divergence. opposite and complementary facets of the same
force: simultaneity or infinity—the womb of the
In a similar fashion, all of us have the potential universe.
to undergo significant changes in the way we see
the world. In more detail, I posit that sequence (which
Logos suggests that influential transformations agrees with general relativity) prevails in
consist of two steps. spacetime, between the appearance (will) of light-
matter from the white hole (birth) and its
1. We enter the one-way bridge of seeing, which disappearance (seeing) into the black hole (death).
immediately connects with a labyrinthine tunnel: By contrast, simultaneity (which agrees with
understanding. quantum physics) prevails in metaspace, between
the disappearance (seeing) of light-matter into the
black hole (death) and its reappearance (will) from

the white hole (rebirth or resurrection). Another time I was shocked to read an article
illustrated with pictures of teenage Siamese girls
As I see it, black holes, white holes, and their who had separate heads and necks but a single
integration through wormholes—within metaspace— body.
point to the dance of sequence (in its aspects of
exclusion) and simultaneity (in its aspects of anti- Although the young ladies could not and cannot
exclusion) in nature’s creative feats. be separated, they behave in different, and often
opposite, ways. Sometimes one head cries while the
As I said earlier, we owe to Pauli’s exclusion other laughs; also, the girls become immobilized if
principle , or the law that Λ calls no convergence, one of the two heads wants to do something that the
the privilege of not sharing with others the same sister head dislikes.
space at the same time as if we were ghosts. We know that the Siamese twins of our second
Exclusion or no convergence, then, allows us to example have one body and two actual heads, each
exist as differentiated entities, by convincing the with its own brain, and we know that each brain has
autistic side of our minds that no part of our bodies different neurophysiologic activities at any given
can be part of the body of any other animal or thing. moment. That suggests that the twins are different
*
(The laws of sequence are responsible for the individuals. To what degree are they different and
rejection that patients with transplants experience.) independent?
Recall that in Zaitchik’s photo task Bert and Big Animals compete for scarce resources because
Bird cannot sit on the same mat at the same what is eaten by one is lost to the other. In the case
time. Thus, in spacetime if we laugh, we cannot of the Siamese girls who share the same trunk and
weep, and if we weep, we cannot laugh. Yet, in the limbs, the energy needs of both are satisfied
metaspace of anti-exclusion in which we exist in simultaneously. Now, if the twins were truly separate
separate worlds or court more than one identity individuals, the same food would not satisfy their
at once, as good actors show, we may laugh and energy needs at the same time. And if they were the
weep at the same time. same entity, the same food would not cause
different reactions, as it does. Hence, we realize why
The experimental evidence revisited in this book the Siamese twins are forced to compete and
suggests that the laws that rule the mind also rule cooperate simultaneously: They are equal and
the micro- and macrocosms. Everything considered, different at once.
the dance of the laws of sequence with the laws of From the viewpoint of recognition, however, the
simultaneity “lies” in any natural system. Siamese twins are either one and the same person
To better explain this concept, I will describe a or two different persons. Hence, if one of them is
weird phenomenon that exemplifies unity in given a house, the other could never own it and
difference. might even be forced to pay rent or else be evicted.
If each twin marries and a child is born, from the
Some time ago I was taken aback at the sight of
teenage Siamese twins who were conjoined in the
upper part of their heads. *
The observation was made by B. A. Maher (July 16, 2002).
viewpoint of recognition, the baby must belong to separate and unique identity in spacetime, we share
only one of them. in each other’s world in metaspace.
This example shows that although everything is
and is not everything else, our recognition forces us The core of creative simultaneity does not lie in
to open an abyss between similarity and difference. being the other, a state that would reduce the
For example, if I need to exploit others, I easily see universe to the self, which happens in the case of
that they are different and therefore my enemies; the tail of soulless acolytes of authoritarian or rigid
and if I need to join them, I see that they are similar leaders. We court simultaneity when we pretend to
and therefore my friends. Either option spurns be others and to think as they may do, although we
creativity. will never know what they may think. It is the only
way to compete and cooperate simultaneously; to be
Difference, in particular, is our strength and our one, two, and many individuals at once; to feel free;
weakness, for it leads to conflict, and conflict is risky. and to share the control of the ship that hosts us all:
Yet, without a clash of opposites in our minds, in the the Earth.
family, or in the larger social group, the spark of When we do not co-create our world by paying
creativity is gradually extinguished by a stifling attention to simultaneity (for example, in a country or
sameness in which everyone does the same thing. in a family in which power is concentrated in one
We need conflict. But if blessed conflict cannot be individual), whether we conform, fight, are
managed, we end up applying our creative imprisoned, or jump ship, sooner or later the
intelligence to destroying whoever and whatever absence of empathy and balance will sink the ship.
crosses our way.
The dilemma is that disagreement, although vital Autistics suggest that growth in an individual, in
in reaching a new agreement, may easily lead to the a social group, and in the cosmos emerges out of
speedy obliteration of a social system. Salvation lies the dance of finite sequence with infinite simultaneity
in understanding the lesson offered by the Siamese or of certainty with doubt. This dance points to the
twins: We must compete and cooperate at the same magic of the clash of opposite interpretations of any
time because—in metaspace at least—we are and issue, which opens up myriad possibilities of
are not our travel companions. The unified system renewal. In it, our divided or simultaneous
the twins comprise cannot allow its parts to become attention/intention (understanding) re-creates our
independent because many parts, starting from the undivided or focused attention/intention
twin’s genetic code and fingerprints, belong to both (recognition) when we choose what is good for
girls simultaneously. So, in order to grow, the two both the part and the system to which it belongs.
sisters must accept, through the mediation of
understanding, that they are equal and different at Although our impulse to survive (desire) may
the same time. compel us to take the lives of others, humility invites
us to realize that we are not above any living
Human beings, families, countries, and every being—not even above matter.
member of the biota share the dilemma of the
Siamese twins. Although each individual has a Logos suggests that mind, matter, and all things
in the universe obey the laws of both sequence and
simultaneity, which are linked through seeing and

will, in order to change without changing (a
paradox).
In other words, the laws of the inverse
dynamics (simultaneity) that guides understanding
in metaspace resets the laws of the direct
dynamics (sequence) that guides recognition in the
spacetime perceived by autistics and by the autistic
circuitry of our minds.
Since we may enjoy knowing more fully the laws

that have created us, in the next chapter I examine
the remaining six laws that make up simultaneity and
*
the six that make up sequence (Cassella, 2002b).
*
Eight laws is what I have found so far; there may be more.
CHAPTER 8 The Laws of Simultaneity and Sequence

***************************************************************
By its very nature, any search for the roots of speed at which photons move between our bodies
creativity must encompass finite sequence, the and the mirror is not infinite. Second, within creative
direct dynamics that favors conservation, and its ubiquity, we pay attention at once to simultaneously
complement, infinite simultaneity, the inverse concordant and discordant views of the same thing,
dynamics that promotes renovation. which is equivalent to perceiving ourselves and
another person in a mirror although there is no one
In this chapter, I sketch the cognitive laws of else around.
each principle. So far we have seen the first two of The self that agrees perfectly with himself or
the eight laws of sequence (the law of no divergence with others does not know freedom. When we
and the law of no convergence [p. 38]), the principle accept what agrees perfectly with our view of the
that guides recognition in spacetime; and we have world (the kind or recognition that we and autistics
seen the first two of the eight laws of simultaneity experience in front of a mirror) or mirror the view of
(the law of ubiquity or divergence and the law of others, we are far from simultaneity.
consubstantiality or convergence [p. 39]), the Therefore, in passing mirror self-recognition
principle that guides understanding in metaspace. I (chapter 6), autistics follow the third law of
now introduce the third law in each set. sequence, which states that
Sequence adores perfection and shuns 3. the image in a mirror corresponds to who
imperfection. For example, when we stand in front of or what stands in front of it (conservation
a mirror, we feel absolutely sure that the image we by reflection).
see in it will mimic perfectly and without a moment’s
delay whatever we decide to do. This extremely Now, the strange aspect of the “perfect” replicas
credible control persuades us that the replica of the offered by mirrors is that they reflect the opposite of
self in the mirror “is” the self. Is that the work of what stands in front of them. As the left wing
simultaneity? Not yet! If we think that the image is opposes the right wing in many European
the self and only the self, we are dealing with parliaments, what is right becomes left in the mirror,
sequence. and vice versa. Thus, for a moment we might say
Creative simultaneity has little or nothing to do that the image in the mirror is not the self. Indeed,
with distributing ten million pictures of a singer, how could the opposite of something be the same
printing one hundred million books on the utopian thing?
views of a dictator (as with Mao in China), or
replicating the same hamburger one billion times. Blind to the joke of infinite simultaneity, autistics
There are two reasons why we are looking confuse the letter b with its mirror image, d, and the
neither at simultaneity nor at its awesome power letter p with q (Cassella, 2002b). In fact, to believe
when we perceive only our selves in a mirror. First, that b differs from d—as p differs from q—is
although we cannot observe it, there is a moment’s equivalent to accepting that the image that we see in
delay, for the theory of relativity tells us that the
the mirror—while standing in front of it—corresponds Indeed, from metaspace, the third law of
to another person—and worse, to our enemy. simultaneity posits that
In effect, autistics would never agree with the 3. the image in a mirror is and is not what
proposition that one thing could be another thing, stands in front of it (transformation by
particularly that one thing could be its opposite. reflection).
For example, in my son’s view—as in a mirror This means that to a nonautistic person, b and d
that truly conserves reality—the phrase “your book,” are variants of the same symbol, that is, they are
when I give him a book, continues to be “yourbook” and are not the same letter, depending on the
when he asks for it another time. Why should it context at hand. A theatrical production may help us
become a different thing—“mybook”—or worse, its understand this paradox.
†
opposite—“my book” when he asks for it? (Consider In Eugène Ionesco’s The Bald Soprano, Mr.
that the possessive mine opposes the possessive and Mrs. Martin—bizarre characters—bring to life
yours, which is equivalent to not mine.) the mirror image of their daughter Alice. Here is the
At my insistence, and after a struggle, he may story.
accept that something has become something else In the play, the Martins enter a dull English
or even its opposite, but his rigidity will continue to home as visitors who do not know each other.
disrupt his communication with others. Thus, if I During their humdrum dialogue, they come to
insist that he should call the object “my book” and believe that, unbeknown to them, they are husband
not “your book,” from then on, he will conserve it as and wife. They are led to this unexpected conclusion
“mybook” in his mind. when they realize that they live in the same town,
street, building, and apartment and share a daughter
Autistics live by the belief that we cannot easily (Alice), who has one red eye and one white eye.
shift from what is to what is not. By no means can Mary, the maid, rejects their logical conclusion,
they grasp the possibility of transforming it into what saying that Mr. Martin’s daughter has her red eye on
is and is not at the same time. Hence, they cannot the left, whereas Mr. Martin’s daughter has it on the
understand that the image opposite us when we right. According to the maid, then, our mirror image
stand in front of a mirror corresponds and does not is a different person, in the same way that identical
correspond to the self. twins are different individuals (imperfect control or b
For example, although identical twins may be ≠ d).
*
the mirror image of one another, our recognition Ionesco suggests that the Martins’ belief of
needs to believe that they are different persons; but viewing our image in the mirror as the self (identical
our understanding is fond of believing that they are twins are the same person) is an absurdity, and that
and are not the same person. Mary’s belief of viewing our image in the mirror as a
different person (identical twins are different
*
Tina Mahoney, the mother of a pair of identical twins, told me persons) is equally absurd. Where is the truth?
that at birth the girls had the same mole, the same lines on their
heads, and the same damage in the same blood vessel, but on
opposite sides of the body. The fact that they were the mirror †
image of one another underscores Logos’s view that the The play is revisited in more detail in The Flameless Fire
meeting of similarity with difference rules the universe. (Cassella, 2002b).
The fact that the self is not visibly transformed

We get Ionesco’s insightful message in The Bald when we rotate is why autistics confuse the number
Soprano when we value simultaneously the rigid 6 with the number 9, the letter b with the letter q, and
view of the Martins (b = d) (recognition) and the rigid the letter p with the letter d (Cassella, 2002b).
view of the maid (b ≠ d) (nonrecognition). The result
is a flexible stance (b = d and b ≠ d) (understanding). By contrast, within pretending, we can muse that
This is equivalent to saying that identical twins are
and are not the same person, an absurd proposition 4. a rotation may change the identity of what
that, nevertheless, may refresh our world. rotates (transformation by rotation).
I will enrich the example by passing from According to the law of transformation by
symmetry in reflection—within the third pair of rotation, then, a lion (the predator) might become its
cognitive laws—to symmetry in rotation, which opposite, a gazelle (the prey), by turning 180
animates the fourth pair. degrees.
Reflections respond to a 180-degree rotation of
the plane that contains a figure. In fact, if I draw a b To appreciate the significance of such an
on a transparent sheet, it becomes its mirror image, absurdity, let us go back to the transparent sheet
a d, when I look at it from the other side. depicting the letter b. If you sit opposite me, by the
law of transformation by reflection (the third law of
But if I turn the sheet clockwise, the b becomes simultaneity) you will see a d.
a q. And if I turn the sheet 180 degrees, by the law of
transformation by rotation (the fourth law of
If I show my son the transparent sheet with the b simultaneity) I will see a q, and you, a p.
on it, and I rotate it while he stands at my side until it
becomes a q, he will continue seeing the same
letter, b. To him, the letter b cannot change into the
letter q, as a goblet does not change into a bell if we
turn it 180 degrees. Yet, if I insist that he has a q, he
either will accept it as such from then on or will b d
recognize it randomly as a q or a b. b d
To my son, no thing can become another thing
when turned; for example, we do not wake up as
another person after sleeping with our head at the
foot of the bed. Consequently, the fourth law of
sequence maintains that In more detail, while I see a q, I also see that you
see a p, and vice versa. I also remember that the
4. a rotation does not change what rotates letter was originally a b to me and a d to you; and
(conservation by rotation). you too realize that I see the q instead of the b. In
sum, the dance of the realistic memory of
recognition (see proper self and Zaitchik in chapter
4) and the insightful fantasy of understanding (see object; and that the object does not differ from itself
*
false belief in chapter 3) allows me to see that you because it is what it is.
see that I see that the combination of the laws of But the thought that an object is what it is does
transformation by reflection and of transformation by not tell me what it is—a situation that becomes scary
rotation has created four different meanings of the when the mysterious object may respond to opposite
same sign at the same time. meanings.
The fact that we both know that the sign, For instance, a drug is what it is, but if I do not
expression, or text has four meanings know what it is, instead of helping me, it may harm
simultaneously in metaspace does not contradict the me. Furthermore, a drug may be beneficial to some
laws of conservation by reflection or rotation that rule and harm others, showing that almost everything
spacetime. Indeed, if we were pressed to spell the courts opposite meanings and the infinity that ‘lies”
letter, we would not be able to utter four different between them.
sound patterns at the same time. We could oscillate
between two patterns, repeat the same pattern over The simultaneity that expands a single image
and over, or utter any one of the four different into multiple meanings and the sequence that
patterns each time; but which of the four patterns attaches a single meaning to it seem incompatible
would we choose? and hopeless; and yet the existence of autism
suggests that they are complementary. On the way
Viewing competing options for the same place in to exploring their dance in letters and syllables, let
the sun (simultaneity), by itself, paralyzes the us sing some of the virtues of recognition, the aspect
decision-making process. (Recall the hesitation of of the mind that follows sequence in believing that
normal subjects compared with autistics in Zaitchik’s everything it knows is just what it seems to be and
photo task, discussed in chapter 4.) nothing else.
Sequence’s isolated help is necessary but
insufficient. Indeed, if I spell the letter as I know it Recognition feels justified in following the law of
(say, b), and you too spell it as you know it (say, d), conservation by rotation, namely, different views
we will never agree with each other. of an object do not point to the existence of
Since the symbol in question appears in several separate objects. For example, a frontal view and a
thousand words, how come most of us (except side view of an elephant do not suggest that we are
persons with dyslexia) are able to read without looking at two different animals.
making too many mistakes? In the same way, multiple views of the letter a do
not mean that we see multiple letters.
An analytical view might stress that in the case
of b, d, q, and p the actual unitary “object” is a visible The letter a conserves the same unique
marking on a transparent sheet; that the marking meaning when we rotate the transparent sheet that
might be described as consisting of a straight line supports it because all its possible views are
with a small circle at one end; that like all objects, it referred to a unique, central, and legitimate
can create a different image on the retina and in the view and meaning, which autistics and our
visual nervous system of the observer if it is viewed
from different angles; that these images are not the *
In B. A. Maher to A. Cassella, July 16, 2002.
autistic side of the mind, recognition, will repeatedly with joy at the sight of unending repetitions of the
recognize. letter o. In my view, that is why my autistic son goes
The central meaning, around which all different into ecstasies when he turns the lids of cooking pots
views of the same object turn, reflects symmetry. on the floor or runs his index finger along the edges
The symmetry that allows the repetition of a pattern of a dish, saying, “Circle, circle, circle.”
or unity in a movement is another way of expressing
the law of conservation by rotation. The letter o does not change when we rotate the
sheet, except in two positions. If we place the sheet
For example, there is one repetition of the perpendicular to us, the o—or any letter, for that
*
legitimate a in a 360-degree rotation. I express matter—would vanish.
recognition’s partiality for symmetry by saying that in
the case of the letter a, the pattern reappears after a That would not matter to my son. The letter o is
360-degree rotation, or “one pattern, one stored in the memory of his recognition. Recognition
reappearance”: leads us to firmly believe that that letter will come
back safe and sound.
1 → 1. Whenever they become familiarized with an
object, by walking around it if necessary, most
If the letter drawn on the transparent sheet were autistic individuals memorize its geometry to
†
X, and we turned it 360 degrees on its axis, we perfection. In their minds’ eye they see the object
would see the legitimate meaning four times. Our from any point of view as if they were walking
autistic recognition, in love with repetition, would be around it in reality—the gift of guarding images
pleased by four appearances of the legitimate without the disruptive action of the doubt introduced
pattern: by understanding.
1 → 4. Indeed, autistics’ conception is as real and literal

as their perception. And that is the root of all their
Finally, if the letter on the sheet were an o drawn problems. Autistics cannot easily deny what they
as a circle, placing the sheet on the floor and conceive, as they cannot easily deny what they
dancing around it would always show the same perceive.
image. In that case, turning one sign 360 degrees
would produce an infinite number of repetitions of We can deny what we conceive; and that opens
the legitimate pattern: the door to the possibility of denying what we
perceive (madness).
1 → infinity.
Whether they see one, four, or an infinite
Because our recognition is the seat of basic number of repetitions, autistics recognize what
feelings, we may imagine that it would be flooded matches a central and unique meaning stored in
their memory; and they feel at home. To autistics,
†
The examples of the letters x and o are in B. A. Maher to A. *
Cassella, July 16, 2002. This example is given in B. Maher to Cassella July 16, 2002.
there is neither death nor birth; there is only come back is the ability to deal with both familiar
immortality in conservation, repetition, and certainty (as in the letter a) and anomalous
reappearance. Thus, when they are confronted with ambiguity or equality in difference (as in the letter
*
anomaly—as in the letter b, for example—they are b).
lost.
Autistics cannot deal with the simultaneous
The letter b, an example of the funny nature of equality and difference introduced by the letter b.
understanding, cannot be read when it is used Thus the fifth law followed by recognition posits that
alone.
However, if we combine recognition with 5. the parts of a system cannot be
understanding—in the way our creative mind simultaneously equal and different,
works—we can read a text without falling into the essential and nonessential (rigidity).
trap of rigid interpretations or the distress of
confusion. That is, to the autistic or rigid person, things are
In more detail, combining the letter b with the either equal or different.
letter o would not help; we would still confuse bo Yet, by virtue of the corresponding law in
with od, oq, or po. metaspace, true leaders envision that
Combining b (beta in Greek) with a (alpha in
Greek), however, would be necessary and sufficient 5. the parts of a system are simultaneously
because only one view of the letter a holds equal and different, essential and
legitimacy. There is only one way to read the syllable nonessential (flexibility).
ab. The rigid letter a, or alpha, complements the
flexible letter b, or beta, as certainty complements An example of the influence of this law is a
ambiguity. democratic government in which multiple
Logos suggests, then, that the reason we can interpretations of a problem and competing solutions
read words that contain teasing letters and numbers are taken into consideration before a decision is
(for example, b, d, q, p, N, Z, u, n, 6, 9) is that we made.
anchor ambiguity (understanding) in legitimacy Agreements reached by counting votes are
(recognition). necessary but insufficient to satisfy the dream of
minorities (“I have a dream!” cried Martin Luther King
The balancing act in the union of the letter a Jr.). A system becomes sustainable when every part
(legitimacy-rigidity) and the letter b (ambiguity- may participate in the creative process. (People who
flexibility) may be viewed as a metaphor for the are not allowed to create, or are not taught how to
alphabet and for the magical key that opens the gate use their creativity in co-creating the world with
to the path of knowledge in any field: the dance of others, may try to destroy themselves and the
finite sequence and infinite simultaneity. The duo system that would not or could not help them.)
ab, or alpha-bet, tells us that certainty, or the
known, is necessary but insufficient to tackle the
*
unknown. The magic that allows us to go through The quandary of dyslexics might be related to the disruption of
the chasm between the known and the unknown and their ability to balance legitimacy (as in the letter a) with
ambiguity (as in the letter b, for example).
Definitely, in a democracy, all ways contribute to recognition. Paradoxically, by empowering and

the main path. demoting specific variants through our will, we
change without changing.
The same trend is observed in quantum
electrodynamics. Richard Feynman suggested that For example, an actor can be Hamlet only when
the path of light is the product of the sum of all the he acts in Shakespeare’s eponymous tragedy, and
alternatives by which a photon can go from point A he can be himself only when he is not acting, since
(here) to point B (there). in spacetime, separate worlds cannot occupy
Autistics do not take into account alternatives the same space at the same time. So, if the actor
when deciding to go from here to there. If my son is does not leave behind (virtually) his habitual self
taken to school, for example, he will accept only while he acts, he will be booed; similarly, if he
known routes. Indeed, according to another law of continues to be Hamlet beyond the stage, he risks
sequence, psychiatric confinement.
Let us say, then, that the habitual or prototypical
6. only a known path can connect two points self of the actor and the Prince of Denmark are
(no detour). opposites. In spacetime, opposites cannot safely
meet face to face by following the law
By contrast, through the corresponding law of
simultaneity, we hope that 7. the encounter of equivalent opposites
annihilates the system (x – x = 0)
6. any path may connect two or more points (annihilation).
(detour).
Let us notice, however, that the actor playing
On the way to Rome, we may consider that Hamlet switches back and forth between his habitual
safety may lie not on the main road but on a longer self and the prince—as in a pendulum—because he
and bumpier side road. is both of them in metaspace. That is, the actor re-
Perhaps our dreams will be realized not by the creates us and himself by following a compelling
choice of a course but by the choice of the absurdity, namely
attitudes—sobriety and humility, above all—that we
may summon when facing the riddles that infinity will 7. the encounter of equivalent opposites may
place in our path. To be sure, with the right attitude, regenerate the system (x – x = ?) (re-
all roads lead to Rome. creation).
Two thousand years ago, if there was a road Again, the law of annihilation (introduced by
that did not lead to Rome, the eternal city would not Piaget [1983]) and the law of re-creation, as
have been considered the center of the world. envisioned in Λ, complement each other. In fact,
because the creative actor dwells in incompatible
By the same token, the cluster or sum total of ill- contexts at the same time (simultaneity) in
assorted variants or aspects of the self— metaspace, he exists in a single spot in
understanding—renovates the center of our identity:
spacetime (finiteness), albeit a different one at 8. effects must follow their causes
every turn of the road. (irreversibility).
Simultaneity allows us to embrace separate Our knowledge about the world and our ability to
and even opposite tenets at the same time. We predict the future rest on knowing what moves what.
may see such a posture as equality in difference. And yet we enjoy exchanging causes with their
Thus, if the members of a system are equal and effects.
different—the dilemma that haunts Siamese twins— For example, in a movie I saw a long time ago,
they must decide whether they will destroy each X, a criminal, pays for the dental work of a beggar,
other or create together. identifying him with his own name, X, in the dentist’s
office. Subsequently, he incinerates the poor fellow
When parts are just equal, the risk of mutual in an old building. By comparing the teeth of the
destruction is nil, but creativity is improbable. dead man with his chart at the dentist, the
Creativity has no place in the world of order investigators identify the victim as X, the criminal.
pursued by the armies of fundamentalist clones who And, on the basis of fake evidence planted by the
follow the dictates of a seemingly revolutionary and killer, they convict Y, an implacable opponent of X.
“illuminated”⎯but in fact rigid, authoritarian, and While Y is on the verge of being electrocuted, the
conservative⎯prince. truth emerges unexpectedly. If this diabolical
Neither can creativity exist in the chaos in which scheme had succeeded, Y, or the false “cause” of
everyone takes advantage of everyone else through the “assassination” of the assassin, would have
deceit or superior force. In a world of chaotic become the effect of the criminal’s misplaced
egotism, construction is replaced by destruction. creativity, while the false “effect”—that is, X, the
In sum, in a world of sterile order or mayhem, murdered “murderer”—would have become the
people cannot balance giving with receiving by cause of the execution of an innocent person. This
standing in incompatible worlds at the same exchange between cause and effect is enthralling
time, which is akin to exchanging a cause with its because the “assassin” is in the person of the
effect. murdered beggar, in the person unjustly accused of
murder, and in the murderer himself—that is, in
Piaget (1983) considered reversibility (the last three irreconcilable universes at the same time.
law of simultaneity in Λ) the key to creative
intelligence. Reversibility allows us to imagine that This story shows that the assassin used the
power of his understanding—which operates in less-
8. effects may precede or be exchanged with than-perfect control—with the aim of reaching
their causes (reversibility). perfect control. His unwillingness to share control
with simultaneity led him to lose control for good.
To autistics, exchanging causes with their
effects (recall my comment about the movie Minority The next chapter extends the application of the
Report) is impossible or chaotic, for they firmly Logos model to discourse and democracy, fields of
believe that thought and action in which we play with less-than-
perfect control at every turn of the road.
CHAPTER 9: ` Discourse and Democracy

**************************************************************
Ambiguous letters—b, for example—designate The ironical, hence double, meaning attached
referents at odds with each other. In Latin, “ambi-” to the verb seeing in the second sentence shows
means “two things at the same time.” Its that the second bat’s sense of wonder and humor
meeting with “-guous,” a participle of the verb leads it to conserve its precious energy for a better
“agere”—“to act visibly”—points at things that are hunt in the future.
what they are and something else or, better, that Delaying gratification rests on the ability to see
could be different from what they seem at first obstacles as opportunities for growth and fun. By
sight. contrast, choosing, immediately and automatically,
The word “ambiguous,” a synonym of “cryptic” a rigid interpretation (clarity) and its associated
and “enigmatic,” also suggests the promise of an response (desire)—which happens when
invaluable gift. In fact, the fascination that many recognition imposes the more familiar context on
sacred texts exert on us lies in the haziness of us—in the end leads to confusion, embarrassment,
many passages, a situation that has led to and frustration.
millennia-old disputes over their meaning. I explain this point by offering a funny story of
the highs and lows in the world of metaphorical
When seeing the meeting of separate, bats.
mismatched, and even opposite worlds behind the
visible words of a narrative, we have fun and An envious and hungry bat asked a chum who
obtain a gift from simultaneity. was entering the cave with its mouth full of blood to
To the creative side of the mind, the meaning show him the place in which he had found an
of a word may transcend the rigid knowledge astounding amount of the nourishing liquid.
*
guarded by the autistic side of the mind. “Let’s go see it,” mumbled the returning bat
For example, in the sentence and immediately took his hungry buddy to the
vicinity of a new billboard a few miles from the
After seeing countless fat prey cave.
animals in the line of its flight, the
thrilled bat returned to the cave “Do you see that strange wall in our customary
with its mouth full of blood, line of flight, pal?” asked the bat while blood
continued seeping from his mouth.
the verb seeing reflects one view of the world and “I see it, I see it!” shouted the formerly
one emotion only. By contrast, the same word discouraged and now extremely excited bat.
points to the meeting of clashing feelings and aims “Well,” replied his companion with a broken
in the sentence voice, “I did not see it!”
After seeing the “fat” emptiness in

the line of its flight, the spirited bat
headed back to the cave with an
empty mouth.
*
A metaphor, since bats navigate by sound, not sight.
The story shows that flexibility in courting other. This opening is as rewarding as it is
mismatched or opposite interpretations of the dangerous.
same sign makes for comedy and tragedy. The cocktail of promise and risk obtained by
sharing control with others becomes the ambrosia
As in the experiment of appearance and reality (the nectar of the Olympian gods) of the creative
(recall the marble egg discussed in chapter 3), by person. Paradoxically, we enrich the knowledge of
being too rigid we may miss the cognitive feat that the self and the other if we deepen the mystery of
allows us to embrace diametrically opposed the self and the other. Truly, should anyone
contexts at the same time. succeed in removing the mask from the face of
The failure of autistics in reading ambiguous Zorro, the Phantom, Superman, Batman,
words tells us that without simultaneity there is no Spiderman, and similar heroes and antiheroes,
creative choice. fantasy would fade, and reality would be nothing
but a cold and dark prison.
Choice becomes possible when we follow the Such an outcome awaits us when we pursue
ways of Theseus—the mythical Athenian prince rigid knowledge and power. In fact, upon reaching
who consented to going to the island of Crete in the final truth—whether it lies in the belief that
order to save his friends in the labyrinth. Before science has nothing else to discover (the end of
going in, we may tie to legitimacy (a context about science) or in rigid interpretations of sacred texts—
which we are absolutely sure—as with the we will become prisoners to invariant beliefs.
invariable meaning of the letter a, for example)
one end of the string we carry. That done, we can Autistics in love with invariance would not
go into the labyrinth of ambiguity, holding the other understand the humorous story of the two bats or
end tightly, and face the Minotaur, which, instead any story in which the protagonist is misled by its
of being a composite of bull and human, might be attachment to literal interpretation. In their innocent
a dragon, a legendary obstacle. rigidity, they believe that a word holds the meaning
they know well in any context, just as the letter a
In my view, the snaky monster that King Minos stays the same from any point of view. They cannot
might have kept in the labyrinth stands for our misuse the power of ambiguity as in deceit or
almost invincible feeling of self-importance or self- double-crossing because they ignore its existence.
pity, which compels us to use the power of Neither can they use it to re-create others—the only
simultaneity for our exclusive benefit. use that may re-create the self.
The sword with which we may kill the monster Altogether, autistics cannot match our ability to
before returning to a refreshed reality is our go (seeing) into the world of doubt in which we
capacity to deal with mystery and danger by court falsity, stay there while we look for a new
balancing separate and even mutually exclusive truth, and “come back” (will) to a new reality.
tenets or, more precisely, to place the views and
desires of the self between parentheses while we
listen to the different views and desires of the
*
Still, going and coming back with a gift that Exploring the capacity for using pronouns
changes our world is an impossible suffices in glimpsing the mystery of ethics,
accomplishment. language, and even sorcery.
Our recognition, by reason of its mission—the
conservation of true reality—is compelled to My son cannot understand that the phrase
oppose change, which it associates with “your shirt,” when I give it to him, must change into
nonrecognition. Between truth and falsity, or “my shirt” when he asks for it. After many years of
recognition and nonrecognition, there is an behavior modification, he now says, “You-I want
impassable chasm. Autistics cannot bridge it. We your-my shirt.”
can! What helps us succeed? My and your are opposites; and yet they are
not! Indeed, the pen I called mine when I lent it to
Providentially, nature has come up with an you a few minutes ago turns into your pen now that
ingenious way to go around the direct dynamics you give it back to me. However, if the object has
that drives recognition! That way is the indirect or become your pen, why do you give it back to me?
inverse dynamics that drives our understanding. How is it possible that I get to understand you with
Recall that the creative side of the self (or the utmost clarity, even though you do the opposite of
second column in figure 1, p. 14) is simultaneously what you say?
recognition and nonrecognition (the first and the To my son—who conceives only of the laws
third column). The capacity to play with both truth that oppose yes to no or 1 to 0, as in modern
and falsity simultaneously—as in doubting—allows computers—the situation is incomprehensible or
our understanding to place anything in the space immeasurable. The object cannot be my pen and
of anything else and, especially, in the space of its your pen simultaneously, for that implies that it
opposite. For example, the belief that the sun belongs to my world and to your world, and that
turns around the earth was once recognition, it is here and there at the same time.
and the opposite belief, nonrecognition. Owing
to the insight of Copernicus and Galileo, in time, A similar impenetrability haunts autistics, for
nonrecognition became recognition and vice instance, when we use if, maybe, however,
versa. although, but, by contrast, and so on. It may also
The cognitive dynamics that allows us to occur with any word, syntactic arrangement,
become anything and even our opposite offers an situation, or phenomenon that introduces conflict
incredible power in any field in which we wish to between limits. Within creative discourse, syntax
display our creative intelligence—from the ethics provides innumerable ways to introduce the
that invites us to succeed by loving our enemies to simultaneous play of convergence with divergence
the grammar that invites us to use pronouns that takes us beyond the confines of the known.
successfully. Neither grammar books nor sacred Autistics cannot answer an open-ended question or
texts can tell us how we do it; otherwise we could give a novel view of anything because they cannot
build human robots and more. become their opposite—the magic offered by the
laws of simultaneity. They cannot inhibit the rigid
*
In Sanskrit, one of the names of the Buddha, “That-a-gata,” dynamics that forces us to choose between 1 and
means “he who goes and comes” (conversations with Dr. C. 0. Hence, they renew their view of the world only
Quinn of Harvard University in 1996 and 2002).
through trial and error or strenuous effort, “unchanging” aspect of a changing world (as with
prompted by the people who love them. the letter a, for example). Because he cannot do
that, he cannot “grow” by going to separate or
Paradoxically, the moment our home worlds mismatched worlds and coming back.
are renewed, they become “permanent” in the
view of our recognition. My son lives exclusively in the spacetime of
If we are lucky enough to come back home recognition, which is reflected, for example, in rigid
with something new yet “permanent,” we will semantics. Throughout the taxonomy guarded by
semantics, every sign remains legitimate and
• give it a name; permanent, as with the DNA code with which we
are born and the unique name we receive soon
• recognize its manifestations repeatedly; and after birth. Within recognition, DNA codes and
names marry at birth and remain associated after
• use its legitimate, invariable—hence, our death, as if our identities waited in a limbo for
reliable—meaning as an anchor to explore some kind of resurrection.
the world of the in between without getting By contrast, within the metaspace of
lost. understanding, death and resurrection occur at any
turn of a spontaneous conversation. Creative
Only permanence justifies the act of attaching discourse owes to flexible pragmatics, the ability
a repetitive pattern called name to an object or a that allows us to cross mismatched contexts (as in
concept. In love with conservation, autistics have a joke).
no difficulty with semantics, understood here as
the taxonomy through which recognition guards Spacetime, the world of autism, is made of
names, the images corresponding to their “unique” roads that never cross each other because autistics
referents and their “invariable” meanings. cannot deal with the simultaneous disjunction and
My son is fond of showing his ability to conjunction introduced by pragmatics. Their
remember the correspondence between a specific familiarity with the laws of sequence helps them
referent or group of clones and a specific name. cope only with semantics and the rigid aspects of
His knowledge reflects what we tell him. syntax, as their repetitive use of known words,
Therefore, he cannot understand our strange sentences, discourses, routines, and movements
penchant to associate a name, an image, or a sign shows.
with opposite meanings—a situation observable in
a pun. For him, discourse is reduced to the Still, our recognition of invariant patterns is a
semantics of linking a single referent to a single miracle. How could we repeat a melody played on
meaning and a single name. different musical scales and different instruments
without the aid of the laws of sequence? How could
Consequently, he cannot choose the proper we recognize words and syntax rules if they
variation out of a cluster of clashing alternatives varied unexpectedly according to the delusional
(for instance, the letter q as a possibility of the views of others?
cuadrivalent b, q, p, d) and anchor the gift to some
Recognition must be rigid, but in normal movements, back and forth from dissonance to
children this rigidity is set aside by pragmatics resonance, in the poem that elicits joy and sadness
(Cassella, 2000), which uses the laws of at the same time.
simultaneity to readjust semantics, syntax, and Autistics tell us that we think creatively when
physical means of expression (spoken or written we balance interpretations that compete and
words, for example). cooperate in finding the novelty hidden behind the
Pragmatics thrives on paradox, which can be literal meaning of a text or the face value of reality.
equated with a crossroads. For example, if by the We are in balance or harmony when we realize that
word barber we mean the man who shaves the repetition of patterns may allow us to recognize
whoever does not shave himself, is he or is he not the words of a poem but is insufficient for tackling
a barber when he shaves himself or is shaved by its metaphors, the key to exploring the charm that
others? According to Λ, in that crossroads, he is animates the universe.
and is not a barber. In the same fashion, when a
Cretan informs us that all Cretans lie, is he or is he Another example is the way we deal with
not a liar? Again, he is and is not a liar. metonymy. In this kind of figure of speech we
exchange causes with their effects (for example,
Unlike the rigidity of semantics, the flexibility of although a surgeon may be a good “scalpel,” we
pragmatics accommodates the epistemic frame pay the man or woman and not the “knife”).
(attitudes, beliefs, habits, and so on) of the self
and of the other simultaneously (Padrón, 1996). Both metaphor and metonymy point to the feat
This happens when we stand at a crossroads, or of understanding, which enters into action when we
the meeting point of converging and diverging think of the meeting of incompatible worlds.
contexts. In it, we exist in more than one world For instance, during an unusually hot summer I
at the same time, although we are in one place may tell a friend who is going north for a vacation,
only. “When you come back from the North Pole, would
you bring back an iceberg?” In my playful comment,
With the help of simultaneity, pragmatics helps the conditional mode expresses the doubt that
us to understand art metaphors in which invisible looks at “yes” and “no” at the same time,
worlds “lie” behind visible words or vice versa together with the metaphor, which is invisible to an
(Cassella 2002b). autistic. The conditional mode also reflects the fact
For example, the beauty of a poem “lies” that I value the independent existence of the other,
behind the “visible” sound, rhythm, and literal for I understand that I must share decisions with
meaning of its verses, in the silence and others (understanding’s less-than-perfect control)
invisibility of its metaphors. Autistics cannot and not attempt to control events totally.
“hear” the silence or “see” the invisibility of the By contrast, when my son says “Give me ice,”
enlightening world of metaphor created by his use of the imperative points to a view of the
ambiguity. Thus they indirectly tell us that other person as an object (recognition’s perfect
recognizing the literal meaning of what we control).
perceive is not enough; we may want to pay
attention to the ambiguity that creates magical
Unfortunately, rigidity, which in autistics is Logos suggests that a desire for extreme order
married to innocence and powerlessness, leads to extreme chaos, whereas creativity thrives
becomes extremely dangerous in the empowered between order and chaos (democracy).
person whose capacity for empathy or for Authoritarian persons will not accept, and autistics
integrating opposite feelings was warped during will not understand, that, as in a democracy, the
infancy. only way to stay in control is to share control.
In general, the authoritarian facet of the self is
less creative and less loving of pragmatics and of When we share control via the pragmatics that
the less-than-perfect control with which we enlivens democracy, rather than objects, people
welcome the views of others as they welcome become thinking or creative subjects. Their world
ours. Dictatorial people love the rigid semantics changes from a collection of artificial contraptions
and legitimacy rooted in perfect or absolute or lifeless replicas to a live system, one that is able
control. They do not realize that, contrary to their to regenerate itself—that is, to grow—and to
desires, it will someday become imperfect control. overcome the challenges that infinity places in its
They miss the simultaneous convergence and way.
divergence that characterize the social world as in
a true democracy. The next chapter adds to my “con-fusion” of
the rules of verbal usage, science, art, and religion.
CHAPTER 10: In the Beginning Was the Logos

**************************************************************
We may balance the unease introduced by doubt
with the wonders brought about by hope and love. As I said before, and much to the chagrin of
Our balancing act will allow us to link clashing fundamentalists, the simultaneity that animates the
worlds, refresh reality, and grow. creative dance between separate worlds arrives by
Through doubt, without ceasing to be who we doubting.
are—a finite event—we enter the bridge of Through doubt, simultaneity taunts us—for
seeing and walk with hope toward the infinity in instance, with the mysterious nature of light (is it
which we are our selves and others particles or waves?), the enigmatic smile of
simultaneously. If others reciprocate by trying to Leonardo’s Mona Lisa, the resonance of guitar
be us in spite of continuing to be who they are, strings in the yearning notes of Memories of the
love generated in this fashion leads us to the Alhambra by Francisco Tárrega, and the temptation
bridge of will, toward a renovated finiteness. of power, as in the stretched bow string on the
verge of releasing a deadly arrow.
Hope and love arise from a shared control; Physicists, painters, musicians, and hunters
and to share control with another animate being who deal with simultaneity are extremely sober.
means lending one ear to the rigidity of logic, They know that only by denying our self-importance
which resides within sequence or finiteness, and and knowledge—a dangerous and wondrous
both ears to the flexibility of magic, which is within step—can we open the gate to the world between
simultaneity. order and chaos (the second column in figure 1, p.
Simultaneity or infinity, in the invisible world of 13) and, hopefully, return home with a gift.
hope and love (metaspace, or the world between
order and chaos), re-creates its complement, the For example, Einstein entered that world
sequence or finiteness that conserves unique (through seeing) when he realized that Newtonian
patterns in visible reality (spacetime, or the world mechanics could not explain why the speed of light
or legitimacy as opposed to illegitimacy). does not lend itself to addition or subtraction. He
left ambiguity behind (through will) with a present:
The complementarity between the invisible the theory of general relativity, which—unlike
(within the domain of quantum physics) and the quantum mechanics—does not lean on
visible (within the domain of general relativity) Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle.
resists our attempts to eradicate simultaneity by Einstein created only while he was “mist” in the
reducing reality to finite measurements. fog. (The common sound of the words “mist” and
The only known absolute in the universe—the “missed” brings about funny double meaning.) After
speed of a ray of light that goes from here to exiting the world of ambiguity for good, he
there—is tricked by infinity, which exchanges here unsuccessfully tried to integrate gravitation with
(the cause) with there (the effect) because it is quantum physics. Perhaps the obstacle to the
both here and there, being and nonbeing, and all integration was that he did not assign a key role to
other opposites simultaneously. doubt in nature’s affairs, a role that the quantum
physicist Niels Bohr considered complementary to both simultaneously. The law of annihilation
the one played by certainty. (see chapter 8, p. 64), by which opposites cannot
meet, forces irreconcilable alternatives to enter
“God does not play dice” is one of Einstein’s spacetime one after the other. Still, shifting from
best-known aphorisms (cited in Hawking, 1990, p. one scheme to its reverse, or from a particle to its
56). Still, the Logos model suggests that we anti-particle in visible spacetime, implies the
should not confuse the dance of order and chaos encounter of opposites in invisible metaspace, as
(the second column in figure 1) in quantum exemplified by the actor who is able to play just one
mechanics with mere randomness. character at a time because in the realm of fantasy
he is all of his contradictory aspects. (In the movie
Under the light of Λ, we may open the door Dr. Strangelove, however, the actor Peter Sellers
between the certainty of the world assessed by animates several characters at the same time—a
general relativity and the ambiguity or play of trick made possible by technology.)
opposites that characterizes the world of quantum
mechanics. The key to the door is the suggestion We grow when we both separate and integrate
that gravity has a dual nature. In fact, Alan Guth clashing contexts. In a similar fashion, the
(1997) theorized that in the beginning of time, expansion of the universe reflects the magic of the
gravity did go into reverse when a seed that simultaneous separation and integration of gravity
weighed only about an ounce and had a diameter and antigravity.
more than a billion times smaller than a proton By virtue of the law of re-creation (see chapter
was inflated to the mass/energy of what makes the 8, p. 64), by which the meeting of opposites in
universe today. metaspace brings about the good news, both our
Departing from the view of Roman ways and the cosmos’s ways of playing with
philosopher-poet Lucretius, who wrote, differentiation and integration are resolved in
metaspace.
ex nihilo nihil [nothing is born out of nothing] (On
the Nature of Things I, 265), Logos posits that creativity, whether in nature
or in the human mind, is born in the invisible
Alan Guth (ibid., pp. 14-15) asserted that metaspace that “lies” between visible universes or
islands of spacetime. Because nothing can be seen
Conceivably, everything can be created out of in metaspace, Guth may be right in calling nothing
nothing.
the invisible behind the visible. Still, nothing is not
enough. As a matter of fact, if everything comes
So far the observation of the universe at large
from it, metaspace or the world between order and
has shown that gravity is only attractive, but the
chaos is nothing (nonrecognition) and everything
inflation theory implies that it was repulsive during
(recognition) at the same time.
an infinitesimal fraction of a second.
In the light of the Logos model, Guth’s views
To autistics that is inconceivable. They cannot
imply that, although in spacetime gravity may be
see through the mist of simultaneity in which
either attractive or repulsive, in metaspace it is
everything embraces nothing. Paradoxically,
invisible metaspace may become visible to us by

virtue of the fact that simultaneity does not play a As we saw in chapter 9, semantic sequence
creative role in the minds of autistic individuals. and pragmatic simultaneity embrace each other in
The autistic person seeks certainty and rejects the first two letters of the alphabet and in the
ambiguity without realizing that without ambiguity ambiguous words that elicit our creative
certainty becomes asphyxiating. imagination.
Since the word logos means “to speak
As I said before, confusing the ambiguity creatively,” I highlight the power of human language
inherent in simultaneity (the second column in with the expression
figure 1, p. 13) with chaotic nonrecognition (the
third column) may have hampered Einstein’s effort logos = word.
at linking general relativity with quantum physics.
Although no one has realized his dream yet, the Words would be meaningless if they did not
evidence on the creative role of simultaneity is depend on referents, expressions, or phenomena
overwhelming. I cite the vision of J. P. McEvoy made of light and matter. Because all things rely on
and O. Zarate (1996, p. 170) (bold and italic the interaction (the issue was discussed in chapter
typeface, as well as color, is mine) on the link 7, p. 53) of Pauli’s exclusion (the law of no
between the visible and the invisible: convergence in Λ) with the anti-exclusion principle
(the law of convergence), I add that
This means that in spite of the local
appearances of phenomena, our world is
logos = world.
actually supported by an invisible reality
which is unmediated and allows
communication faster than light, even The dance of the law of no convergence with
instantaneously. the law of convergence also drives continuity in
change. There is no better example of permanence
In outlining my view of creative intelligence in
in transformation, sequence in simultaneity, identity
the universe and in the mind, I reinforce a similar
in diversity, or unity in plurality than the one offered
message throughout the book.
by living systems.
As I emphasized in chapters 7 and 8, visible
Thus, we may say that
spacetime and invisible metaspace energize each
other by the complementarity of the laws of
logos = life.
sequence and the laws of simultaneity. The
dance of the two principles, which animates light,
As mentioned (see chapter 7. p. 53), the light
matter, and the curious mind, may be equated with
* that reveals the other to the self and vice versa
logos (“creative word” in Greek), the grand
obeys the dance of the laws of sequence and the
principle or force implied by the Logos model.
laws of simultaneity, which makes up the structure
of creative thought posited by the Logos model.
* Therefore, we may add that
The word logos comes from the Greek verb legein, which
means to choose, to recount, or to speak creatively. It entered
philosophy around the fifth century B.C., when the Greek animates permanence in change in the social and the natural
philosopher Heraclitus used it to point at the force that word.
are born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh .

. . but of God. . . . Nobody ever saw God . . . but
logos = light.
the way is open to us.
If we did not see each other or meet in familiar The dance of the visible and the invisible—
reality, we could not share hope and love along which Saint John depicts with the Greek word
the road on which we grow by transforming the logos—animates nature and the human mind. In
terror of the unknown and the boredom of the visible reality, opposites seem to exclude one
known into the joy of new wonders. The living way another (sequence). In invisible reality, however,
from certainty to doubt (seeing) and from doubt to they diverge and converge at once (simultaneity).
certainty (will) is also the way of permanence in The complementarity between the two principles
change. makes the nature of growth, or nature’s nature.
Perhaps Lao Tzu saw a similar phenomenon The indescribable grand principle or force that
when—according to legend—he recited his view of enlivens the story of everything in the universe may
nature and the social mind in his work Tao Te be described as sequence in simultaneity,
Ching (The way and its virtue) to a border guard. simplicity in complexity, masculinity in femininity,
Pleased with his teachings, the guard let him pass conservation in renovation, repetition in change,
to the other side, the world of mystery. reality in fantasy, perfection in less than perfection,
As with Lao Tzu, if we convince the border completeness in incompleteness, certainty in doubt,
guard (a metaphor for the guardian of our identity: faith in hope, rigidity in flexibility, competition in
recognition) that tao, the way by which we go and cooperation, pride in humility, severity in
“come back,” renews permanence, we may be compassion, selfishness in empathy, desire in love,
allowed to exit our familiar world in search of separation in togetherness, hierarchy in
novelty and growth. democracy, law in freedom, perfect control in less-
That is why I suggest that than-perfect control, science in magic, enthusiasm
in sobriety, seriousness in humor, foretelling in “co-
logos = way. incidence,” and finiteness in infinity,
In sum, we may express the mystery of unity Notice that the words preceding the preposition
in difference that is present in the mind and in in point to recognition (in agreement with the first
nature with the expression column in figure 1, p. 13) as opposed to
nonrecognition (in agreement with the third
logos = word = world = life = light = way. column). The words that follow the preposition in
describe understanding (in agreement with the
Now, let us read Saint John (1, 1-18) (bold second column).
and italic typeface, as well as color, is mine): What we have seen so far tells us that there is
no contradiction between what precedes and what
In the beginning was the logos [word] . . . and follows the word in, for recognition and
the logos was with God, and the logos was
understanding are complementary. Unfortunately,
God. . . . All things [the world] were made
through the logos . . . life (which was in the our autistic side cannot but confuse the world of the
logos) was the light of human beings. . . . We
in between (the second column) with the world of have chosen a stream of thought known as meta-
nonrecognition (the third column). hermeneutics. I feel that “meta-hermeneutics”—
Joan of Arc was burned at the stake because which makes literal interpretation
of this confusion. Too often we burn the Joan of complementary to metaphor—might raise some
Arc that challenges the sacredness of our routines anxiety in readers. Let us observe that this
and knowledge. Few people realize that behind bombastic name stands simply for our capacity to
any intended or unintended offense master pronouns, which autistics lack and we
(nonrecognition) hides the world of the in between possess without possessing, since we do not
(simultaneity), offering invaluable opportunities for understand why and how it works. The point may
grow. be illustrated by recalling the meeting of Tarzan
Paradoxically, salvation comes from loving the and Jane in a forgotten movie.
people who wish to offend us. The point is not
easily understood. Envision Jane saying “I Jane!” while pointing to
herself, and then “You?” while pointing to Tarzan.
Anger, ignorance, fear, greed, and pride lead Then, envision the “ape-man” answering, “You
fundamentalist, pious, or rigid minds to confuse Jane, me Tarzan!”
the inspiring magic of simultaneity inherent in the Tarzan never thinks of answering “Ijane,
world of the in between with superstition, Youtarzan!” for he knows he is in his place (here)
witchcraft, or the devil’s work (the third column in and in her place (there) simultaneously, in the
figure 1). Rigid people fail to notice that in the view same manner that Jane is herself (here) and
of their enemies, they are the evil shown in the Tarzan (there). Or, better, Tarzan is and is not
third column. Jane, as Jane is and is not Tarzan.
But the third column shown in figure 1 is
essential. Without chaos or nonrecognition, the Even if an unschooled ape-man understood
second column (the world between order and that social intelligence rests on the ability to be and
chaos) would vanish; and without the second not to be, the branch of philosophy that studies our
column, the first one (order, certainty, or capacity to create, namely meta-hermeneutics,
recognition) too would cease to exist. remains diabolically complicated. Good luck!
The time has come for adding a philosophical

perspective to the Logos model. To that purpose, I
EPILOGUE “To Be and Not To Be”

**************************************************************
The encounter and separation of opposites, or the from itself. I call that kind of mental blindness
mysterious complementarity between certainty “changing: without changing.” (Notice the
and ambiguity glimpsed by quantum physicist position of the semicolon!) From the dictator in
Niels Bohr, rules fundamental physics, evolution, search of immortality in life to the suicide bomber in
our use of language, art, religion, and philosophy. search of immortality after life, rigid minds cannot
Therefore—even though my comparison may accept changes that will introduce novelty.
seem farfetched to some—I equate Saint John’s
logos with the philosopher’s stone. However, people who seek absolute power—
Alchemists’ legendary aspiration to transmute compelled as they are to destroy anything they
lead into gold was based on the view that all cannot control—may end up suffocating their own
natural systems lean on the mysterious principle selves. Definitely, the attempt to hold on to the
by which similarity meets difference. That view status quo forever by reducing novelty to
was first proposed by the Greek-Ionian predictable outcomes is not sustainable.
philosophers Thales, Anaximander, Anaximenes, By contrast, if we decide to set aside the desire
and Heraclitus in the sixth and fifth centuries B.C. to enlarge the world of the self, we will meet the
In the thirteenth century A.C., Saint Francis other and grow together by “changing without:
*
reflected a similar insight by praising the forces of changing.” (Notice the changed position of the
nature, including death. By the same token, semicolon.) In social growth, we share the same
alchemists, philosophers, and mystics of the space at the same time with strangers and even
Middle Ages made no distinction between mind enemies or stand in our world and in their world
and matter. simultaneously. (Incidentally, would Palestinians
The distinction came in modern times when and Israelis accept the laws of simultaneity?)
Galileo and Descartes showed that we could
predict the future and prevail over nature’s less- Beyond the worship of “changing: without
than-perfect planning. changing,” the predictability sought by recognition,
renovation, or “changing without: changing,” occurs
We misuse the scientific knowledge acquired when we accept both the cross and the wonder of
by our innate creative power when we exploit aiming our minds in opposite directions before
nature with a view to conserving the familiar world. integrating mutually exclusive stimuli in a new
For example, unchecked consumerism, excessive whole.
population growth, fundamentalism, the race to
manufacture weapons of mass destruction, drug We re-create our selves only on the road where
abuse, revolutionary guerrillas, and mafias reflect the confrontation between being (truth) and
our desire to impose our will and ways on others.
Under these trends, social creativity dwindles
*
because the rigid self who does not share control This idea is similar to the contrast between a sterile “reading:
with the other will never create anything different without reading” and creative “reading without: reading” which
was proposed by Larrosa (1996).
nonbeing (falsity) is the initial step in the dance When we watch the play, although in
that leads to the transformation of the world. metaspace it is only sheer fantasy, we perceive
As long as truth and falsity embrace each quite emotionally Hamlet’s world—the fruit of
other in the creative side of the minds of persons Shakespeare’s fantasy—as if it were real. Indeed,
who to some extent doubt the face value of reality, by the law of divergence, we are “there,” in the past
they will renovate their world, although the (an impossibility) and in a Denmark that never
challenge of it may bring death. existed (another impossibility), although we never
leave from “here.” Hamlet’s story energizes our
Hamlet exemplifies this way of thinking. The selves in an ineffable way.
play is creative and vibrant as long as the Prince In dwelling here and there simultaneously,
of Denmark remains tormented by the dilemma we place between parentheses permanence in
expressed in the words “to be or not to be,” which repetition (the blind alley of fundamentalist minds)
we might view as “to be and not to be.” The with a view to embracing permanence in
dilemma stems from the fact that Hamlet is unsure change—an absurdity.
whether his uncle Claudius—who takes over the
throne after his brother dies and marries his Twenty-five centuries ago, in his work Over
widow, Hamlet’s mother—is an assassin. If Hamlet Nature, Heraclitus was the first philosopher to posit
were autistic, by taking appearance for reality he that permanence and change are inextricably linked
would consider his uncle innocent and marry his in a principle he called logos. Born in Ephesus, a
beloved Ophelia. If he were mad, upon hearing the maritime colony of Greek Ionia (today part of
accusations of his father’s ghost at the beginning Turkey), he highlighted the value of the ambiguity
of the play, he would kill Claudius right away. that hides behind anything that exists. He wrote:
In either case, the tragedy would end with no
pain or gain. However, as long as Hamlet sees Seawater, the most pure and the most unclean,
to fishes potable and healthy, to men
that truth and falsity—two diametrically opposed
undrinkable and damaging. (Cappelletti, 1972,
worlds—share the same space at the same time p. 95)
in Claudius (the devious king whom Hamlet sees
as “lying” in two opposite worlds, innocence By positing that seawater is and is not pure
and guilt, at the same time), the tragedy simultaneously, Heraclitus implied that any text
captivates the divided (simultaneous) attention of may point simultaneously to competing
its viewers. meanings. (This is metahermeneutics in a
While wandering in the world between truth nutshell.) In the example, seawater is a healthy
and falsity, Hamlet faces the demon of doubt, and substance to some and poison to others. Hence,
providential doubt provides him with the energy he seawater, a single entity, is two things
needs to live and find the truth. When he finds it, simultaneously, which is equivalent to saying that
his life and the lives of his friends and foes the same thing “lies” here and there or in
(excepting Horatio, the witness) vanish into independent worlds at the same time or that it
nothingness. makes unrelated worlds equal and different at
the same time.
With his apothegms, Heraclitus seems to acting, getting a joke, appreciating a metaphor,
suggest that life breathes in the invisible oscillation reading poetry, meditating, and the like.
between integration and differentiation.
Actually, in another fragment he wrote: Saying that the creative side of the mind thrives
on what is and is not simultaneously is an absurd,
and from all things, one, and from one, all bizarre, nonlogical, and disturbing suggestion! And
things. (Cappelletti, 1972, p. 90) yet, the idea of simultaneity cannot be dismissed!
When we make it complementary to sequence (any
As we have seen, unity in plurality and fixed positioning or linear scheme), the resulting
equality in difference are different ways of pointing energy animates permanence in change in the
to the same thing: the bizarre meeting of being social and the natural world.
and nonbeing in the world between order and
chaos, which autistics cannot fathom (the second Permanence in change, growth, evolution, or
column in figure 1, p. 13). whatever we may want to call it, occurs when we
try to put ourselves in the place of another person,
Autistics and persons driven by the rigid side animal, or plant without ceasing to be who we are—
of their minds (sequence) cannot imagine that that is, when we live in separate, dissimilar, or
what they perceive or conceive may be viewed clashing worlds simultaneously before returning,
under a different light by others. temporarily, to a refreshed world.
If they realize—after incontrovertible
evidence—that the view of reality that clashes with Heraclitus said so about 2,500 years ago. But
their interpretation is right, they change abruptly, his views appear as obscure to modern
abandoning what is not and embracing what is. philosophers as they did to the best Greek minds in
In short, to them, everything either is or is antiquity. Indeed, I wonder whether Aristotle and
not. In their view, we cannot integrate is with its Plato ever understood Heraclitus’s message⎯that
opposite—is not—by dwelling in irreconcilable is, if they saw the dance of divergence (seeing)
worlds at the same time. with convergence (will) that refreshes the world
To sum up, autistics and rigid minds cannot through the complementarity of rigid sequence and
follow Hamlet in doubting, King Claudius in flexible simultaneity.
double-crossing others, and Heraclitus in playing In fact, Aristotle (Metaphysics, 4. 3, 1005 b 23,
with double meaning. They cannot do that cited in Cappelletti, 1972, p. 75 [the use of bold is
because to do so means embracing being and mine]) demonstrated poor judgment and
nonbeing simultaneously or being here and astonishing rigidity when he wrote:
there at the same time.
For it is impossible that somebody comes to
believe that the same thing is and is not at
By contrast, when we embrace competing
the same time, as some think that Heraclitus
interpretations or responses, we find ourselves at says.
once here and there. At that “instant,” everything
is and is not simultaneously—as with pretending, It is hard to believe that Aristotle’s logic and
metaphysics continue to influence our vision of the
universe after more than two thousand years. words attributed to this philosopher by Plato in the
Indeed, his philosophy builds the foundation of eponymous dialogue. To be sure, perhaps a
computer science—and even of many a religious century before Aristotle blindly criticized
dogma in the Roman Catholic Church. Heraclitus’s Logos, Parmenides, pointing to the
Ionian philosopher, wrote (recall the case of the
By contrast, Plato—Aristotle’s teacher—came Siamese teenagers who share the same body):
near the nonlogical world of the in between (figure
1, p. 13) when, at the end of Parmenides, his most People of two heads, . . . blind . . . and foolish,
who think that being and nonbeing are and
abstruse dialogue, he emphasized the
are not the same thing. (Cerri, 1999, p. 151)
complementarity of the separation and union of
opposites. Remarkably, considering that Plato
Parmenides was the first to write that the
himself wrote Parmenides, the title figure, the
morning star and the evening star were not different
philosopher Parmenides from Elea (an ancient
and unrelated but one thing only: Venus, the planet
town in southern Italy), supports neither the
known in antiquity as Lucifer or Bearer of Light
absolute unity of being as opposed to
(ibid., p. 58). He failed to notice that Venus appears
nonbeing prized by the Eleatic school he
when day is and is not day, in the twilight of
founded nor Plato’s bias for a plurality of
sunset, and when night is and is not night, in the
preexisting, differentiated, and unchanging
twilight of dawn. Thus Venus may be taken as a
patterns. Parmenides, the only dialogue in which
metaphor for the ambiguity that characterizes
Plato expresses doubts about the coherence of his
infinity. Blinded by his dream of perfect knowledge
own theory of unchanging ideas, concludes with
and control, Parmenides seems to have missed the
this baffling comment (bold is mine):
light of creative thought. Paradoxically, by
devaluing the world of opinion (metaspace in Λ) in
The one, whether it is or it is not itself and the
others from it, per se and reciprocally, is all favor of the rigid world of order as opposed to
there is . . . and is not; it seems to make up chaos (spacetime in Λ), he became the founder of
the whole . . . and does not seem to make it. logic, metaphysics, and science.
(Fonterotta, 1998, p. 113)
Parmenides’ rigid physics and metaphysics

To Fonterotta, the words of Plato-Parmenides
prize the change from the plurality rooted in illusion,
mean that the truth about the concept or our
deceit, and hell (the third column in figure 1) to the
interpretation of reality consists in being one and
unity sought by classic science, bureaucracy,
many, everything and nothingness, at the
fundamentalism, and any utopia (the first column
same time (ibid., p. 112). (Recall the case of the
in figure 1).
letters b, d, q, and p in chapter 8.)
From the time we married Parmenides’ views
we lost sight of the magic that permeates the
Evidently, Aristotle did not inherit his rigidity
invisible world of simultaneity, which autistics reveal
from Plato. In point of fact, his rejection of the
because they lack it.
simultaneous union and separation of opposites
originates from Parmenides himself—an irony,
Looking at the world of simultaneity as if it
considering the role and, especially, the final
were hell—by confusing the second with the third
column of figure 1—is part of the blindness that we substance does arise from nothingness. (Perhaps
inherited from Parmenides, Aristotle, and other Alan Guth would endorse this interpretation of
supporters of anthropocentric and patriarchal Heidegger’s philosophy.)
order. When Heidegger makes nothingness (the third
In too many minds, a euphoric drunkenness in column in figure 1) complementary to substance
search of total control overwhelms the paradoxical (finiteness or sequence), he reintroduces
and mystical view of reality that philosophers like simultaneity in the history of philosophy. His view
Heraclitus and mystics like Lao Tzu, the Buddha, shows the insufficiency of the autisticlike
Saint Anthony, and Saint Francis showed us. Parmenidean and Aristotelian metaphysics of an
By destroying empathy, especially before it immortal and perfect being that opposes nonbeing
grows strong (for example, by abusing a child in (Cassella, 2000, p. 198).
any way), the person in search of perfect control
refuses to accept the world of fantasy in which Modern views of the world (as in Einstein’s
things are and are not at the same time (the general relativity, Frege’s semantics, and
second column in figure 1). Habermas’s critical theory, for example) continue
responding to the call of order, unity, and sequence
Still, only when we exist in one place at a introduced by Parmenides and Aristotle, as they
time may we meet the other by integrating must.
antagonistic universes—that is, by existing in Postmodern views (for example, as in Niels
both simultaneously. Bohr’s and Richard Feynman’s quantum physics,
Heidegger’s and Gadamer’s hermeneutics, and
In other words, only if the rigid side of the mind Umberto Eco’s art metaphors), however, respond
(recognition) conserves identity and reality can the to the call of freedom, creativity, and simultaneity
flexible side (understanding) deny it without valued by Heraclitus.
denying it, enrich it, and, finally, give it back to a Both sequence and simultaneity are
refreshed recognition. necessary to each other. Their complementarity—
as in the metahermeneutics sketched by Paul
Since we all know about being as opposed to Ricoeur—is the secret guarded in the myth of the
nonbeing (recognition), I will continue emphasizing philosopher’s stone.
being and nonbeing (understanding).
To conclude, imagine that within the
To be in opposite worlds at once—or to be simultaneity that lies beyond space and time,
and not to be—is to find the self in the encounter Aristotle and Plato cannot agree over the
with the other. interpretation of the dance of unity with multiplicity
To the postmodern philosopher Heidegger, in all that exists. Weary of endless arguing, they
only the self that denies itself meets the other in ask Heraclitus for help.
the co-creation of the world (Cassella, 2000). The Ephesian listens to Plato’s brilliant
The extreme humility of the cosmic self that dialectics, admitting soon enough that the Athenian
denies itself in order to encounter the growth of all is right.
others suggests that, in a way, differentiated
“Just a minute! Just a minute!” interrupts is not possible for Plato and Aristotle to be
Aristotle. “Since I disagree with Plato’s theory, you both right?”
cannot tell who is right and who is wrong until you Heraclitus smiles and answers sweetly,
pay attention to my reasoning!” Heraclitus “Evidently, you too are right, my dear friend!”
consents, and after accepting an impressive and
steely piece of logic, is forced to admit that Autistics’ supreme gift to us is their suggestion
Alexander’s teacher holds the truth. that the nature of nature and of our minds “lies” in
At this point, Parmenides, who has been the capacity for “existing” in opposite places at
discreetly watching the lively match and the the same time while we exist in a place at a
nonlogical arbitration, derides Heraclitus by time.
saying, “After twenty-five centuries I finally got
you! Can’t you see that in the world of logic it
REFERENCES
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and Cassella, A. (2000). Fundamentos cognitivos y semióticos de la
statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text creatividad: Aportes del autismo. Tesis doctoral no
revision). Washington, D.C.: Author. publicada, Universidad Nacional Experimental Simon
Asendorpf, J. B., & Baudonniere, P. M. (1993). Self- Rodriguez (UNESR), Caracas, Venezuela.
awareness and other-awareness: Mirror self-recognition Cassella, A. (2002a). El desarrollo de la inteligencia Social:
and synchronic imitation among unfamiliar peers. Aportes del autismo. Maracaibo, Venezuela: Ediluz.
Developmental Psychology, 29, 88-95. Cassella, A. (2002b). The Flameless Fire: From autism to
Asperger, H. (1944). Die autistischen, psychopathen in creative intelligence. Quincy, Massachusetts:
kindersalter. Archiv für Psychiatrie and Logosresearch.
Nervenkrankheiten, 117, 76-136. Cassella, A. (2002c). Autism and creative intelligence: Theory
Astington, J. W., Harris, P. L., & Olson, D. R. (1988). of mind and Logos. Quincy, Massachusetts:
Developing theories of mind. New York: Cambridge Logosresearch.
University Press. Castaneda, C. (1971). A separate reality: Further
Baron-Cohen, S. (1989). Are autistic children behaviorists? conversations with Don Juan. New York: Pocket Books.
An examination of their mental-physical and Castaneda, C. (1974). The teachings of Don Juan: A Yaqui
appearance-reality distinctions. Journal of Autism and way of knowledge. New York: Pocket Books.
Developmental Disorders, 19, 579-600. Castaneda, C. (1981). The eagle´s gift. New York: Simon and
Baron-Cohen, S. (1995). Mindblindness. Cambridge, Schuster.
Massachusetts: MIT Press. Castaneda, C. (1987). The power of silence: Further lessons
Baron-Cohen, S. (1987). Autism and symbolic play. British from Don Juan. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Journal of Developmental Psychology, 12, 397-402. Cerri, G. (1999). Parmenide di Elea: Poema sulla Natura.
Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A. M, & Frith, U. (1985). Does the Milano: Rizzoli.
autistic child have a “theory of mind”? Cognition, 2, 37- Coelho, P. (1998). The Alchemist. New York: HarperPerennial.
46. Courchesne, E., Lincoln, A. J., Townsend, J. P., James, H. E.,
Barrow, J. D. (1994). The origin of the universe. New York: Akshoomoff, N. A., Saitoh, O., Yeung-C-Courchesne, R.,
Basic Books. Egaas, B., Press, G. A., Haas, R. H., Murakami, J. W., &
Barrow, L. D. (1999). Between inner space and outer space. Schreibman, L. (1994). A new finding: Impairment in
Oxford: Oxford University Press. shifting attention in autistic and cerebellar patients. In S.
Bauman, M. L., & Kemper, T. L. (1994). Neuroanatomic H. Broman & J. Grafman (Eds.), Atypical cognitive deficits
observations of the brain in autism. In M. L. Bauman & T. in developmental disorders: Implications for brain function
L. Kemper (Eds.), The neurobiology of autism (pp. 119- (pp. 101-137). Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
145). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Dennett, D. (1978). Beliefs about beliefs. Behavioral and Brain
Bernabei, P., Camaioni, L., & Levi, G. (1999). An evaluation Sciences 4, 568-570.
of early development in children with autism and Devlin, K. (2000). The language of mathematics. New York:
pervasive developmental disorders from home movies: Freeman.
Preliminary findings. Autism, 2, 243-258. Feynman, R. P. (1985). The strange theory of light and matter.
Berthental, B., & Fischer, K. (1978). Development of self- Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
recognition in the infant. Developmental Psychology, 14, Flavell, J. H., Green, F. L., & Flavell, E. R. (1986).
44-50. Development of knowledge about the appearance-reality
Butterworth, G. (1995). Origins of mind in perception and distinction. Monographs of the Society for Research in
action. In C. Moore & P. J. Dunham (Eds.), Joint Child Development, 51.
attention: Its origins and role in development (pp. 29-40). Fonterotta, F. (1998). Guida alla lettura del Parmenide. Roma:
Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. Laterza.
Callender, C., & Edney, R. (2001). Introducing time. Duxford, Gell-Mann, M. (1994). The quark and the jaguar. New York:
Cambridge, UK: Icon. Freeman.
Cappelletti, A. J. (1972). Los fragmentos de Heráclito. Gergely, G. (1994). From self-recognition to theory of mind. In
Caracas: Tiempo Nuevo. S. T. Parker, W. R. Mitchell, & M. L. Boccia (Eds.), Self-
Cassella, A. (1997). Self-other differentiation and self-other awareness in animals and humans (pp. 51-60). New York:
integration from the perspectives of language Cambridge University Press.
development and autism. Unpublished master’s thesis, Gopnik, A., & Meltzoff, A. N. (1994). Minds, bodies, and
Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts. persons: Young children’s understanding of the self and
others as reflected in imitation and theory of mind neurosciences (pp. 625-647). Cambridge, Massachusetts:
research. In S. T. Parker, W. R. Mitchell, & M. L. Boccia MIT Press.
(Eds.), Self-awareness in animals and humans (pp. 166- Rimland, B. (1964). Infantile autism: The syndrome and its
186). New York: Cambridge University Press. implications for a neural theory of behavior. Englewood
Gould, J. (1986). The Lowe and Costello symbolic play test in Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
socially impaired children. Journal of Autism and Rowling, J. K. (1997). Harry Potter and the sorcerer’s stone.
Developmental Disorders, 16, 188-213. New York: Scholastic.
Grice, H. P. (1957). Meaning. Philosophical Review, 66, 377- Russell, J., Mauthner, N., Sharpe, S., & Tidswell, T. (1991).
388. The “windows” task as a measure of strategic deception in
Happé, F. G. E. (1994). An advanced test of theory of mind: preschoolers and autistic subjects. British Journal of
Understanding of story characters’ thoughts and feelings Developmental Psychology, 9, 331-349.
by able autistics, mentally handicapped, and normal Rutheford, M. D., & Rogers, S. J. (2003). Cognitive
children and adults. Journal of Autism and underpinnings of pretend play in autism. Journal of Autism
Developmental Disorders, 24, 129-154. and Developmental Disorders, 33, 289-302.
Harris, P. (1993). Pretending and planning. In S. Baron- Schwartz, J., & McGuinness, M. (1979). Einstein for beginners.
Cohen, H. Tager-Flusberg, & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), New York: Pantheon.
Understanding other minds: Perspectives from autism Trevarthen, C. (1993). The self born in intersubjectivity: The
(pp. 228-246). Oxford: Oxford University Press. psychology of an infant communicating. In U. Neisser
Hawking, S. (1990). A brief history of time: From the big bang (Ed.), The perceived self: Ecological and interpersonal
to black holes. London: Bantam. sources of self-knowledge (pp. 121-173). New York:
Icke, V. (1995). The force of symmetry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cambridge University Press. Ungerer, J., & Sigman, M. (1981). Symbolic play and language
Ito, M. (1993). New concepts in cerebellar function. Revue comprehension in autistic children. Journal of American
Neurologique, 149 (11), 596-599. Academy of Child Psychiatry, 20, 318-337.
Johnson, M. (1997). Developmental cognitive neurosciences. Watson, J. S. (1994). Detection of self: The perfect algorithm.
New York: Blackwell. In S. T. Parker, W. R. Mitchell, & M. L. Boccia (Eds.), Self-
Kanner, L. (1943). Autistic disturbances of affective contact. awareness in animals and humans (pp. 131-148). New
Nervous Child, 2, 217-250. York: Cambridge University Press.
Larrosa. J. (1996). La experiencia de la lectura. Wimmer, H., & Perner, J. (1983). Beliefs about beliefs:
Barcelona: Laertes. Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs
in young children’s understanding of deception. Cognition,
Leslie, A., & Roth, D. (1993). What autism teaches us about
13, 103-128.
metarepresentation. In S. Baron-Cohen, H. Tager-
Wing, L., Gould, J., Yates, S. R., & Brierley, L. M. (1977).
Flusberg, & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Understanding other
Symbolic play in severely mentally retarded and in autistic
minds: Perspectives from autism (pp. 83-111). Oxford:
children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 18,
Oxford University Press.
167-168.
Narlikar, J. V. (1996). The lighter side of gravity. Cambridge:
Zaitchik, D. (1990). When representations conflict with reality:
Cambridge University Press.
The preschooler’s problem with false beliefs and “false”
Ozonoff, S., Pennington, B. F., & Rogers, S. J. (1991).
photographs. Cognition, 35, 41-68.
Executive function deficit in high-functioning autistic
individuals: Relationship to theory of mind. Journal of
Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 32, 1081-1106.
Padrón Guillén, J. (1996). Análisis del discurso e
investigación social. Caracas: UNESR.
Perner, J. (1993). The theory of mind deficit in autism:
Rethinking the metarepresentation theory. In S. Baron-
Cohen, H. Tager-Flusberg, & D. J. Cohen (Eds.),
Understanding other minds: Perspectives from autism
(pp. 112-137). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Piaget, J. (1983). La psicología de la inteligencia. Barcelona:
Grijalbo.
Povinelli, D. J., Landau, K., & Perilloux, H. K. (1996). Self-
recognition in young children using delayed versus live
feedback: Evidence of a developmental asynchrony.
Child Development, 67, 1540-1554.
Rafal, R., & Robertson, L. (1995). The neurology of visual
attention. In M. S. Cazzaniga (Ed.), The cognitive
The Flameless Fire: From Autism and Creative Intelligence
About the Author
Antonio Cassella was born in Ethiopia in 1940. In 1965 he obtained a B.Sc. in petroleum engineering
from La Universidad del Zulia (LUZ), in Maracaibo, Venezuela. In the mid-1960s he joined Creole
Petroleum Corporation, a former Exxon affiliate. After working in the development of new oil and gas
fields for twenty years, he became a strategic planner for Petróleos de Venezuela SA (PDVSA).
In 1994 he went to MIT as a visiting scientist. In June 1997 he received a master’s degree in
psychology, the Thomas Small Prize, and the ALM Dean’s Prize for Outstanding Thesis in the Area
of Natural and Human Sciences from Harvard University for his research on autism. In 1998, after
heading the Special Studies Function in the Corporate Planning of PDVSA, the author retired from the oil industry. In 2001 he
received a Doctorate in Education Sciences from Universidad Nacional Experimental Simón Rodríguez (UNESR) for his work
on creative intelligence and the Logos Model. At present, he is the executive director of LogosResearch.
About LogosResearch
LogosResearch--a concern registered in Massachusetts--promotes research on the roots of autism and creative intelligence,
the continued development of the Logos Model, and the diffusion of its characteristics and potential benefits. The long term
goal of the institution is changing our view of the world, from that of a mine to be depleted in a few years to one of a forest with
which we may grow.
LogosResearch is especially concerned with the application of Logos toward improving the social education of autistics,
retarded individuals, and normal preschoolers. Furthermore, Logos may help any organization interested in enhancing social
values, living conditions, creativity, and working methods.
If you need help in your efforts to improve extant educational methods, tackle a difficult challenge, or set up a new venture, do
not hesitate to e-mail or phone Antonio at Researchautism. Besides providing for consultations with Antonio, LogosResearch
may set up, on demand, conferences and workshops on the Logos Model, Autism, Creativity, and Language Development.
If you need help in coping with autism, in tackling a difficult challenge, or in improving the prospects of any venture, e-mail Dr.
Cassella at director@logosresearch.net, or visit our website at www.logosresarch.net.
Acknowledgments
The Logos (Λ) model is endorsed by:
-CHAIR OF AUTISM−La Universidad del Zulia, Maracaibo, Venezuela

-SOVENEURO−Sociedad Venezolana de Neurología
-UNESR−Universidad Nacional Experimental Simón Rodríguez, Caracas
-AZUPANE−Asociación Zuliana de Padres y Representantes de Niños Excepcionales, Maracaibo, Venezuela
-EL CANDIL−Centro de Atención a Personas con Retardo Mental, Zea, Estado Mérida, Venezuela
-BOSTON HIGASHI SCHOOL, Randolph, Massachusetts
During his research, the author enjoyed the critique of:
-His wife, Ligia Uribe de Cassella, his five sons, and his friend Ana Isabel López
-Dr. Fernando Azpúrua, Dr. Nicolás Barros, Dr. Víctor Córdoba, Dr. José Padrón, Dr. Migdy Chacín−UNESR,
Caracas
-Dr. María Zavala−Free Chair of Autism, La Universidad del Zulia, Maracaibo, Venezuela
© Logosresearch 2002
Creativity at the Crossroads of Life and Death: Autism and Logos (Λ)
YOU MAY COPY THIS DOCUMENT UNDER THE TERMS SPECIFIED IN THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE.
IF YOU WISH TO OBTAIN A SPIRAL BOUND, SOFT-COVER, 8 ½ X 11 COPY, PLEASE EXAMINE

THE “TERMS OF SALE” SPECIFIED IN OUR WEBSITE AT http://www.logosresearch.net.
OR E-MAIL US AT sales@researchautism.com.
COPYRIGHT NOTICE:
© Copyright 2002-2004 Logosresearch. All rights reserved. Permission is granted to copy in its entirety
this document, provided that the copies are not used for profit, that the source is cited, and that the
present copyright notice is included in all copies, so that the recipients of such copies are equally bound to
abide by its provisions. Prior written permission of Logosresearch is required for reproductions intended for
commercial use and exceeding fifty characters or equivalent. If you wish to obtain detailed information
about the commercial use of this copyright, write to director@logosresearch.net.
ISBN 0-9721705-7-X
$ 54.00

Autismbook

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Autismbook

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Creativity at A

Each of these two dynamics contains a set of eight laws.

BY THE SAME AUTHOR

El Desarrollo de la Inteligencia Social: Aportes del Autismo

The Flameless Fire: From Autism to Creative Intelligence

Autism and Creative Intelligence:

The Dance of Order and Chaos:

Published and printed in the United States by Logosresearch, Quincy, Massachusetts

Copyright © 2004 by Logosresearch

LIST OF FIGURES viii

INTRODUCTION: The Crossroads of Life and Death 1

CHAPTER 1 The World between 1 and 0 8

CHAPTER 2 The Dance of Sequence with Simultaneity 17

CHAPTER 3 Being in Two Places at Once 25

CHAPTER 4 Being in One Place at a Time 30

CHAPTER 5 Going and Coming: The Logos Model (Λ) 36

CHAPTER 6 From Walking to Crawling 44

CHAPTER 7 The Universe and the Mind 52

CHAPTER 8 The Laws of Simultaneity and Sequence 58

CHAPTER 9 Discourse and Democracy 66

CHAPTER 10 In the Beginning Was the Logos 72

EPILOGUE “To Be and Not to Be” 77

© 2004 by Logosresearch vii

1. The Complementarity Between Sequence and Simultaneity 13

2. A Sketch of the Logos Model (Λ) of Creative Intelligence 37

3. A Sketch of the Neuro-Circuitry of Creative Intelligence 50

© 2004 by Logosresearch viii

INTRODUCTION Creativity at the Crossroads of Life and Death

To us, “being” another person and “being” in a

CHAPTER 1 The World Between 1 and 0

and their tendency to satisfy their own needs

c la ssic sc ie n c e , m ag ic , evo lu tio n , su p e r stitio n ,

le g itim a c y , lo v e, p atien c e, m o th er, h o p e, ille g itim a c y ,

T h e W orld b etw een 1 an d 0

Figure 1. The Complementarity between Sequence and Simultaneity

Conservation or permanence, the only

CHAPTER 2 The Dance of Sequence with Simultaneity

For example, autistics’ difficulty in seeing the

Our autistic side, however, must reject

Invisible infinity or simultaneity appears when we

CHAPTER 3 Being in Two Places at Once

Olympus (eternal life, heaven) may turn into

CHAPTER 4 Being in One Place at a Time

witch enticed Snow White was simultaneously life-

What is growth but death and resurrection?

The next chapter focuses on the core of the

CHAPTER 5 Going and Coming: The Logos Model (Λ)

Perner (1993) and Leslie and Roth (1993) found

Figure 2. A Sketch of the Logos Model (Λ) of Creative Intelligence

CHAPTER 6 From Walking to Crawling

Figure 3. A Sketch of the Circuitry of Creative Intelligence (impaired in autism)

Since these dynamics are linked to the whole

CHAPTER 7 The Universe and the Mind

2. We exit the labyrinth through the one-way bridge

black hole (death) and its reappearance (will) from

simultaneity, which are linked through seeing and

Since we may enjoy knowing more fully the laws

CHAPTER 8 The Laws of Simultaneity and Sequence

The fact that the self is not visibly transformed

1 → 4. Indeed, autistics’ conception is as real and literal

Definitely, in a democracy, all ways contribute to recognition. Paradoxically, by empowering and

CHAPTER 9: ` Discourse and Democracy