以自闭儿观点写的书

别人推荐的书，我就去图书馆借来看。

书名：The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time
作者： Mark Haddon

前一阵子大家都为自闭担心，我也不例外，因为豆豆虽然不符合大部分的症状，但是他的确有语言发育迟缓，喜欢排直线这些问题。我想多了解自闭症，所以就找这本书来看一看。

这本书其实写得挺好看，因为是侦探小说，作者是带着读者一步一步把谜团解开的。故事是由一只被杀的狗引起的。叙述者是一个十五岁的自闭少年。

书的扉页这样介绍：
Christopher John Francis Boone知道世界上所有国家的名字和其首府，他还可以数到７，０５７的质数。

他喜欢狗可是无法了解人的情绪。他不能接受别人触摸他的身体。虽然Christopher 有个非凡而逻辑性强的脑子，他患有自闭症。 etc...

Christopher 不喜欢和别人作正常交流，别人问他话，他可以答出来，如果你和他聊天 （chit-chat）他就无法奉陪了。时间表和日常规律对他非常重要。他每天的作息安排是要精准到以分钟计算的。他只吃某种食物，因为有些食物的颜色让他和一些他有痛苦记忆的事件联系起来。
他的记忆力非常好，他记得从记事以来所有的人、事、地点和时间。但是这也是个缺点：他不会像常人那样自动过滤我们认为不重要的人和物。

他不喜欢看人的脸，因为人的表情千变万化，他不能及时吸收处理并理解这些表情要表达的信息。（这就是为什么自闭儿不喜欢眼神接触。） Christopher 喜欢熟悉的环境，因为他喜欢知道所有的东西的位置，了解周围的环境，让他感觉安全。到了一个新环境，他有太多的东西要吸收，太多的东西要记忆，这让他感到非常痛苦。他对付这个痛苦的方式是按住自己的双耳，倒在地上大声呻吟。这样做，可以帮助他屏蔽外界的干扰，减轻痛苦。

Christopher 痛恨／惧怕身体接触，他和父母也不拥抱，他的父母对他表达爱的方式是把一只手像一把扇子那样摊开，然后他也摊开手掌，接触指尖。

书里说了一个Christopher 最喜欢的梦，让我看了有触目惊心的感觉。Christopher 的梦是这样的：有一天，世界上大部分的人因为染了一种病毒，都快死光了。最后只剩下那些和他一样不喜欢看别人脸，也不了解这些图画的意思的人。



然后他就可以随心所欲的到别人家里和店里拿东西吃，拿衣服穿和玩电玩。

这本书其实写得很不错，由Christopher 的侦探＂事业＂的推进，揭发了一个重大的秘密，让他了解了他父母的婚姻和他妈妈的死亡真像。书里对Christopher 的心理有细致的描写，让我们可以走进一个自闭儿的内心，了解他们的想法。Christopher 可能属于 highly functional 了，懂行的人说一说吧。


作者年轻的时候长期和自闭儿待在一起（书上说是 As a young man, Haddon worked with autistic individuals），所以对自闭儿的观察细致，有深刻的了解。作者是英国人，所以很多英国的习惯用语，像 bloody something something，我因为看惯了美国人写的书，所以察觉了这些差异。


书中还有不少关于逻辑和数学的题目探讨。我在这里列一个我认为挺有意思的经典题目，叫＂The Monty Hall Problem＂
From Wikipedia:

The Monty Hall problem is a probability puzzle loosely based on the American television game show Let's Make a Deal. The name comes from the show's host, Monty Hall. The problem is also called the Monty Hall paradox, as it is a veridical paradox in that the solution is counterintuitive.

A well-known statement of the problem was published in Parade magazine:

Suppose you're on a game show, and you're given the choice of three doors: Behind one door is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick a door, say No. 1, and the host, who knows what's behind the doors, opens another door, say No. 3, which has a goat. He then says to you, "Do you want to pick door No. 2?" Is it to your advantage to switch your choice? (Whitaker 1990)

Because there is no way for the player to know which of the two unopened doors is the winning door, most people assume that each door has an equal probability and conclude that switching does not matter. In fact, in the usual interpretation of the problem the player should switch—doing so doubles the probability of winning the car, from 1/3 to 2/3.

When the problem and the solution appeared in Parade, approximately 10,000 readers, including nearly 1,000 with Ph.D.s, wrote to the magazine claiming the published solution was wrong. Some of the controversy was because the Parade version of the problem is technically ambiguous since it leaves certain aspects of the host's behavior unstated, for example whether the host must open a door and must make the offer to switch. Variants of the problem involving these and other assumptions have been published in the mathematical literature.

The standard Monty Hall problem is mathematically equivalent to the earlier Three Prisoners problem and both are related to the much older Bertrand's box paradox. These and other problems involving unequal distributions of probability are notoriously difficult for people to solve correctly, and have led to numerous psychological studies. Even when given a completely unambiguous statement of the Monty Hall problem, explanations, simulations, and formal mathematical proofs, many people still meet the correct answer with di*****elief.

我开始的时候，也认为是 ５０／５０ 的机会，所以换不换门，机率都一样。但是看了解释，我就赞同还是要把那个已经打开的门算进来。关键就在你是不是把那个已经打开的门算进来了。直到现在还是有人对这个问题的答案不满意而进行分析研究的。