I can't get past the "Helen Keller was a fake" theory. The idea that she was just retarded and her nurses were just attributing shit to her seems way more plausible than the official story. Debunkings seem to mostly take the line "it's ableist to assume deafblind people would have a hard time writing 14 books"
Was she a virgin?
>>18569496Normalfags will really believe anything. But its not just suburban, subhuman, bored white women who believe this but genuinely intelligent people too. Just ask them how you would teach words for layered, abstract concepts like "love". Or pronouns. Or adverbs. Or an object that doesnt fit in a hand. Watch their brains melt in real time. Helen Keller is about as a real as Koko the Gorilla.But its also not right saying "Helen Keller was a fraud", she was a victim taken advantage of leftist scumfucks to push their (((agenda))).
>>18569496>>18569507The idea that Helen Keller conspiracy is an example of downwardly mobile lumpen ghetto blacks and resentful rust belt whites who are stuck in generational poverty cycles being surprised that spending a lot of resources to educate someone actually works and directing their class resentments toward a long-dead deaf mute.
>>18569496I don't know much about Helen Keller, why are people saying she's a fraud? I assume she wasn't 100% deaf or 100% blind, almost no one is. It's not impossible to educate the deafblind, just much harder especially back in the day when kids like that were written off as a lost cause.
>>18569505>While in her 30s, Keller had a love affair and became secretly engaged; she also defied her teacher and family by attempting an elopement with the man she loved
>>18569526You have a persons hand and a bunch of water, good luck explaining the verbal concept of "existence."
>>18569507True. I mean to say the story of Hellen Keller was a fraud, Anne Sullivan being the fraudster>>18569540"It's not impossible" is a low bar to set. Certainly it's also not impossible that the whole thing was just a turn of the century case of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facilitated_communication. I call the Hellen Keller story a fraud because it's so incredible that it seems genuinely in-credible. The "those sensations on my palm must be a code for the thing causing the sensation on my other palm!" breakthrough story does not seem psychologically or pedagogically reasonable, and every other less-famous anecdote from her life sounds just as implausible. Purportedly she went to college by having Anne finger-spell her lectures in real time. Try reading this post out loud while finger-signing every letter into your other hand. Even with a sloppy made-up finger alphabet, it's impossible. Her autobiography is public domain, and she never says anything about having residual sight or hearing after the illness -- why would she leave that out?https://archive.org/details/storyofmylife0000kell_k6l3/mode/2upIt's full of really hard-to-believe anecdotes. Apparently when she was 3 (a year and a half after being deafblound, three years before Anne showed up), she used a key to lock her mother in the pantry as a prank, giggling to herself as mom pounded the door from the other side (bottom of Page 13). Or check out picrel, relating her memories of her first Christmas with Anne. Does this really sound like a plausible reaction by a deafblind child who only started learning English in the previous 9 months? She would have to be incredibly intelligent, but outside of "wow, a deafblind person wrote this?!", her writings don't actually come across as particularly intelligent or insightful.
>>18569761forgot picAlso her autobiography rings false because she uses so much visual metaphor. The second sentence is>I have, as it were, a superstitious hesitation in lifting a veil that clings to my childhood like a golden mist.which already contains two visual metaphors and a reference to a color. How is it even possible for a person deafblind since age 1.5 to conceptualize things like this? Presumably the argument would be she's regurgitating metaphors from other authors and conversations, but she never has her own metaphors based on scent, taste, or feel. She barely even describes how things smell, taste or feel. On Page 5 she talks about how in her pre-Anne days she loved feeling the garden and identifying plants like "trailing clematis, drooping jessamine, and some rare sweet flowers called butterfly lilies", but she never actually describes how these plants felt. The whole book is like this. She only ever describes odors with generic words like "subtle" and "strange".
>>18569771Will also point out that on the next page of the Christmas story, she was delighted to receive a "new doll and a white bear". Not a soft bear or a fuzzy bear, but a white one.Other HK skeptics also say her writing changed dramatically after Anne Sullivan died and Polly Thompson became her companion.It's both fun and infuriating to read Redditors defending against HK fraud allegations. Nobody ever actually provides evidence that conflicts with the phony facilitated communication hypothesis. It's always just>what, you don't think people with disabilities can achive things?
>>18569496How did she write in ballpoint pen before it was invented?
>>18569943You're thinking of Anne Frank
>>18569957pretty sure that's the joke, but I do find it interesting how common the "confusing Anne Frank with Helen Keller" phenomenon is, despite the two stories having nothing to do with each other. It's like some part of us recognizes they're essentially fables for pushing social messages
>>18569962Anne KellerHelen Frank
>>18569962I am an external world skeptic. I doubt absolutely everything unless I can see it right in front of me, and even then I hold a healthy skepticism towards its existence.
>>18569943Regular reminder that Anne Frank did not write her diary in ballpoint pen and anyone who tells you she did is lying directly to your face. Protip: she specifically writes about using a fountain pen in the diary itself.
>>18570134Kek. I'm sure you doubt everything(aka things that contradict with my world view) except believes and ideas you were born into
Koko the gorilla but human
>>18569526you're right about the demographics of the average HK skeptic but you've got the reasoning backwards. The only reason people believe the story is because they learned it at school, and the underlying moral of her story is "every child is bursting with potential, waiting to be unlocked by the right talented teacher". Doubters are more likely to come from classes that put less stock in the education system
>>18570770Can confirm.They taught absolutely everyone about HK in elementary school.Their reasoning, in my estimation, was to fluff up the education system.If even the blind deaf can learn under their pedagogy, you youngins' don't have an excuse. But that's just my opinion, and for what it's worth I won't weigh in on whether or not HK was legit or not. I'll never know for sure.The part of that which gives me some pause is the documented successes other blind deaf have had subsequent to her success.I can't imagine the method implemented for them doesn't draw on her experience.
>>18571025>The part of that which gives me some pause is the documented successes other blind deaf have had subsequent to her success.afaik the successful deafblinds are either only partially deafblind or became deafblind later in life, and there's not a single case of somebody deafblind from infancy obtaining the same accomplishments as HK
describing all the new things she was learning about three months after she learned her first English word
>>18569962It's not common at all outside of America. Americans are genuinely retarded. They just hear some random names at school, but don't know who they are or why they're famous. It's also why this stupid idea of "Mandela effect" exists. Americans only remember words "Mandela" and "prison", nothing else. So their brain goes "died in prison", because why not. Literally no one outside of America thinks he died in prison. Because how could he, when he was a president later.The whole Mandela effect is just american ignorance and lack of basic education.
>>18571272Meds. Take them.
>>18571272rent-free
>>18571025>They taught absolutely everyone about HK in elementary school.never heard of her before reading something from I think Carl Sagan. she's an american hero.
>>18569496I can maybe understand questioning her writing that that many books, but otherwise I don't really see a reason to think it was a completely made-up story. There have been many other deafblind people who've become educated before and after her.
>>18571782Completely deafblind since infancy? Who?
The easiest way to see if other people wrote for her, is by analyzing her text. Every person leaves fingerprints in their writing styles, and as one reads them, you get a sense of which ones are authentic and which ones are fake. It's how, for example, people have determined some of St. Paul's letters are in fact fake.
>>18571858People claim that her writing style changed significantly after Anne Sullivan diedthe HK autobiography has a bunch of notes/letters from Anne as appendices, if you've got a good eye for writing voice then have a lookhttps://archive.org/details/storyofmylife0000kell_k6l3/mode/2up
>>18571038>every tree that is pleasant to the sightWhat an odd thing for her to say.
All this after 14 months of English as well as the general concept of language. I wonder how Anne taught her about negroes
The water story, the sudden realization that sequences of taps on your hand can be codes for objects in the world, is dramatic and impressive. But in a way it's even more impressive that she mastered the words "give" and "shut [door]" just a few hours later
Do people really think Helen Keller was faking it? You retards do realize that there are over 50,000 people with complete Deaf-Blindness in the US alone right? Most of them learn to communicate similarly to Helen Keller, are all 50k of those people faking it too? Fucking retards
>>18571888no, I think Helen Keller was severely retarded and that Anne Sullivan put words in her mouth, figuratively speakingfind me literally one functional person who has been completely deafblind since infancy
AND ANOTHER THINGHK mentions in Chapter 1 that one of the earliest words she learned as a baby was "water", that she would repeat the sounds over and over again. Later she implies that the "w-a-t-e-r means this substance!" epiphany was related to ghostly memories of this word. How does that make any sense? Why would the sound of the word "water" have any connection to the experience of having the letters "w-a-t-e-r" signed into your hand at all?
>>18569507>Just ask them how you would teach words for layered, abstract concepts like "love".By pointing at their chest and saying "love is here", of course.
still waiting for one (1) example of a person completely deafblind since infancy living a functional lifeIn the meantime have another improbable anecdote, this one about the time HK had a Stand By Me experience on a train trestle as a child
Helen with an extremely vivid account of her first winter
>>18573637It fascinates me how psychopaths seem to be totally incapable of understanding that others could see things differently, even in such blatant cases like this. No wonder that adoring The Catcher in the Rye is such a red flag - psychopaths can't process that the narrator is retarded and wrong about pretty much everything and take it as scathing criticism of society.
>>18573696I have an extremely hard time believing this describes the mental state of a completely deafblind seven year old one year after discovering the concept of language. Try actually putting yourself in her position and "seeing" the way she does. Are you actually struck by the sun shining upon a vast, undulating white plain?"Psychopath" lol. It's fascinating how angry people get at Helen Keller skepticism
>>18573637also HK's "surprise on discovering that a mysterious hand had stripped the trees and bushes, leaving only here and there a wrinkled leaf" on her first visit to New England has to be bullshit, like the trees don't lose their leaves in winter in Northern Alabama
>>18573702Yes, I mean it seems obviously unbelievable. Even if she was making it up herself, it just doesn't seem she could come up with anything like that.Psychopaths seem to be lieve they are (and frequently claim to be) more empathic than everybody else, and enjoy each other's weird fiction, completely unaware of the wrongness.
>>18571888>Do people really think Helen Keller was faking it?faking what, being deaf and blind?
>>18573696this post should be put in a museum
>>18571888>there are over 50,000 people with complete Deaf-Blindness in the US alone right? Most of them learn to communicate similarly to Helen KellerThat's trivially false. None of them learn to communicate anything beyond basic thoughts, which only goes to confirm HK's story is fake.
>>18573756oh lol sorry for being defensiveIdk, people fell for weird stuff back then. Arthur Conan Doyle thought picrel was real.They'll say the same thing about us one day about other stuff I'm sure
>>18571888>Most of them learn to communicate similarly to Helen Kellerno doubt. one groan = 'lead me to the WC right now', two groans = 'fuck it, it's too late, get a bucket of water and a sponge'.
>>18569496Growing up is realizing that most of the world is fake and gay, not just the Helen Keller story.French didn't heroically resist the Germans, they were their servants.The Eastern bloc didn't collapse because freedom loving nations rebelled. They simply ran out of money.Blacks didn't heroically earn freedom, they were gifted it by whites.EVERYTHING is fake. All of it. Civilization wouldn't be able to exist if it was based entirely on truth, because the truth is ugly.
>>18574897Equality? Fake. Women are inferior to men in every way and the colored races are inferior to whites both cognitively and culturally.Love? Fake. It's mostly based on chemicals at best (which doesn't last) and at worst is a calculating transaction.Even the Internet only exists not because smart humans wanted to connect people, but because of the cold war. It was literally created by a weapons company.My point is that the world is a grim, dark place. People invent bullshit myths, because otherwise they would go insane. The Helen keller story is such a myth. It doesn't matter if it is truth. People WANT to believe it is true. It makes them feel good.
>>18574911Saying love isn't real because it's a chemical reaction is like saying hunger isn't real
>>18574935apples and oranges
>>18574897nobody is saying that Easterlings love freedom and eagles and apple pie. we've been saying that Easterlings just fucking hate Russians and their east-German stooges.Exception here for Romania, where Ceaucescu was such a tyrant that the Romanians nonironically did want freedom.So you are wrong on the premise for most of the Warsaw Pact and just plain wrong about Romania.
>>18574944You were given freedom on a silver platter, you didn't fight for it. Very much like negroes in USA.
>>18574911holy edgelord
>>18574897>Civilization wouldn't be able to exist if it was based entirely on truth, because the truth is ugly.That's the lie they use to keep people from rebelling. Kind of like how abusive parents lie to their kids how bad other children have it. They lie that the world is ugly, and you need civilization to protect you from it.
>>18573862There's different levels of skepticismThe dumbest tier is "helen keller never existed" which is extremely unlikelyThen there's "helen keller was faking her disability", which imo would take an unreasonable dedication to the partFinally there's "helen keller was retarded and her Anne Sullivan and Polly Thompson just attributed words to her" which seems on the moneyIn this theory it's still up for grabs whether she was actually deafblind and retarded, or just severely retarded and noncommunicative
There are people on /his/ who are not conspiratorial schizophrenics and who know a lot about history. Is there ANY reason to believe the HK story is true?
>>18576863Ultimately whether or not HK actually wrote everything that was authored by her is mostly irrelevant. A lot of people that are not deafblind have ghost writers, and that is probably the only interesting bit about this conspiracy theory. Her works and activism represented a sort of early push in progressive era America to accommodate Americans with disabilities, something that has ultimately been a largely good, if flawed, public policy. She also had a veer into Marxism, which of course makes her a darling for certain American historians. There were probably thousands of people involved in this informal early movement with far more important roles, but public education handles American history with sound bites and mostly isolated important events/figures rather than comprehensive narrative histories. This makes the average American rather credulous about their own history, and their credulity is often exploited.
>>18576966You sound like you think HK hired a ghostwriter to make writing easier. I'm claiming that HK did no such thing, and that she had no activist tendencies or veers into Marxism, because she barely actually had thoughts about the wider world. Anne Sullivan didn't pretty up a bunch of Helen's rough draft musings about her upbringing, she just straight up wrote them. I guess what makes a conspiracy theory interesting varies from person to person, but the idea that every schoolchild is taught a lie as a fact is interesting to me, as is the fact that it's been perpetuated so long.Or maybe I'm wrong, and HK really was able to describe and reason about the world because of information spelled into her hand. But I need a credible reason to believe this.
>>18569545Typical woman. Always on tutorial mode.
>>18577687She gave speeches pretty consistently and in many different countries, you can't exactly speak to international audiences as a deafblind person without some degree of comprehension of the outside world. It's important to remember that she was not born deafblind; i.e it was not a birth defect or syndrome that caused her affliction. Her cognitive capacity, therefore, is probably similar to other members of her family, which were aristocratic, literate southerners by the way.
>>18578042>She gave speeches pretty consistently and in many different countries, you can't exactly speak to international audiences as a deafblind person without some degree of comprehension of the outside world. Watch this example speech and tell me it isn't compatible with HK being severely retardedhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARdSEljce6Y>It's important to remember that she was not born deafblind; i.e it was not a birth defect or syndrome that caused her affliction. Her cognitive capacity, therefore, is probably similar to other members of her family, which were aristocratic, literate southerners by the wayAye, it was some kind of illness (still unknown) that left her blind and deaf as a 19 month old. I find it hard to believe that only the sensory parts of her brain were affected by it
>>18578089You can catch elements of words forming in her mumbles, it sounds very similar to how deaf people speak. Ultimately the judgment is semantic and somewhat uninformed, it is similar to judging a person with cerebral palsy or cleft palate to be retarded on their inability to speak like a normal person would. The real hole in this theory is that if she was deaf, blind, and retarded, why would they have wheeled her out on the international stage? What possible purpose would that have had when they surely had other similarly physically handicapped but not retarded people floating around?
>>18578113You misunderstand me. I'm not saying "obviously she's retarded, listen to how she talks." I'm saying it is not at all outside the realm of possibility that a retarded person was coached into giving that speech -- do you agree? Every bit of HK speaking footage is her giving a speech or tiny interactions like we get at 2:54 in that video. I would be more convinced by footage of her having an extended conversation with somebody, but I haven't seen it.>The real hole in this theory is that if she was deaf, blind, and retarded, why would they have wheeled her out on the international stage? What possible purpose would that have had when they surely had other similarly physically handicapped but not retarded people floating around?Who's "they"? I'm not positing that there was some shadowy group faking the whole thing, maybe to push marxism like the more paranoid HK skeptics do, just Anne and perhaps a small circle of collaborators, like Anne's husband who helped write Story of My Life. A successfully educated deafblind girl an extremely compelling and inspirational story, of course she gets wheeled out on the international stage.
bit sus
>>18578113>>18578148also, one explicitly stated purpose was deaf awareness
>>18571272being retarded raises your SMV. have being a virgin, Euronerd.
>>18578176forgot pic
>>18578148You are also ignoring that it was, likely, meningitis that made her deafblind. In a 2007 study, which is not necessarily comprehensive or reflective of her specific condition, the authors found>significant differences between patients and controls. MANOVAs within each cognitive domain showed significant overall group differences between patients and controls for “attention/executive functions” (table 3; p=0.03) and for “psychomotor functions” (p=0.03) but not for “intelligence” (p=0.77) and “memory” (p=0.21) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2117539/Another paper says this>Psychometric deficits are frequent after bacterial meningitis, and their relation with neurologic and psychopathologic symptoms is loose. The pattern of neuropsychologic impairment accentuates psychomotor slowing combined with memory disturbances, and resembles features observed in subcortical cognitive impairment.I'm not saying these papers alone point to any definitive conclusion about HK, but they do point to the idea that her sensory disability does not necessarily extend to her overall cognitive capacity. To some extent there are symptoms like executive dysfunction and problems with memory, but severely retarded means something much more than that. I think if I were to be generous to this theory, she was probably of average intelligence and had a ghost writer. This of course flies in the face of her often cited IQ of 163, which I guess you could argue was artificially inflated if you accept the premise that she was severely retarded, but at that point you are kind of twisting facts to fit narratives.
>>18578187Will point out that intelligence and memory deficits in that first paper were much more prevalent than blindness and deafness -- which do happen, but are rare, and I imagine cases that cause such severe outcomes have other severe outcomes as well. The second paper seems to directly contradict what you're trying to say so idk where you're going with that.>often cited IQ of 163is that a real thing? Tried to look it up, ignoring the Google AI that says it's not real I can't find any actual source for it.
>>18578205It does appear to be a circular in its origin, but she did graduate from college and learn how to write while being deafblind, which is quite a bit more difficult than it would be for a normal person to do those things, indicating higher than average intelligence. Either way it doesn't matter, maybe she had a ghost writer, maybe her works were heavily edited, or maybe she got tired in old age.
>>18578220Okay but again literally all of that is also compatible with the theory that she was retarded and Anne Sullivan was putting words in her mouth. These are not arguments for the official story, you're just telling it again. Graduating from college and learning to write while being completely deafblind since infancy is an *extraordinary* achievement that afaik has never been replicated (compare deafblind Harvard graduate haben girma, who has limited sight and hearing and credits her speaking ability to her ability to hear high frequencies)
>>18578226It's not like she stopped writing after Sullivan died. If she was severely retarded this charade probably would have been found out, also probably much earlier along in her career where she was heavily in the public spotlight.
>>18578234No, but her writing slowed down tremendously after Sullivan died. Other people say the tone of her writing changed significantly after Sullivan's death, I haven't read it so I can't confirm. >If she was severely retarded this charade probably would have been found outHow?
>>18578245If she was severely retarded, wouldn't her writing have stopped entirely after Sullivan died, not just slowed down and gotten marginally worse? If she did struggle with executive functioning it would actually make a lot of sense if it just slowed down, and the style of your writing changing after your mentor and editor from childhood dies is also completely reasonable. A lot of things need to be conveniently true for her to be retarded, a lot less need to be true for her advocate to have maybe played a more active role in her writing than publicly disclosed.
>>18578367>If she was severely retarded, wouldn't her writing have stopped entirely after Sullivan died, not just slowed down and gotten marginally worse?No, because the theory is that other people did the writing, maybe her companions, maybe other people in the circle.>A lot of things need to be conveniently true for her to be retardedLike what? A lot of things need to be conveniently true for the conventional history as well.
>>18578169Similarly sus
Come to think of it, there AREN'T any proper interviews with Hellen Keller, and that's weird. There are clips of her giving speeches, there are clips of her and her companion sitting in a room, but no actual conversations. She was presumably healthy until a stroke in 1957, so the technology definitely existed.
>>18569526If you can't question the alleged life of Helen Keller you might be retarded. At best everything was heavily heavily editorialized, but I think the story is 90% bullshit.Like her alleged work has a lot of imaged based metaphors and descriptions, but seems to lack touch, smell, taste (you know the senses she actually had).There is already a trail that he handlers plagiarized a story to lie about her abilities...
>>18569771Can I believe you can teach a deaf blind person already in adolescence language? Yes.I think the basis of the miracle worker is plausible. Everything after the early years of Keller and Sullivan is so suspect it's insane.Then you add in her writing, if it isn't straight up fraud than at best it is heavily edited to the point you have to question what she even wrote. Her use of imagery over the other 3 senses as you pointed out is a massive red flag. Then you can bring up her writing style changed heavily post annes death.Then you add in the plagiarized story that Anne submitted to the school for the deaf and blind... fraud seems probable.We have anecdotes of "wild children"/"raised by wolves" kids who never catch up from a language standpoint. The brain development heavily impacts children's ability to learn and one you miss a stage it is very hard and probably impossible to "catch-up."
>>18571721My experience was they mostly just tell the early story. Ie she got ill as a baby leading to her be deaf blind. She was a wild kid that had to be broken by Anne Sullivan who finally taught hk how to communicate. We did not go over her more improbable feats like writing x books, graduating from Harvard, "flying a plane," or speaking at commies meetings.
>>18571782No there hasn't.Every single documented example is someone who becomes legally blind and deaf later in life. She was a baby! We do have example of children with all 5 senses being severely learning disabled because they didn't experience language until later in life. A few example of the raised by wolves trope. None of those individual went to Harvard lol.
>>18574547Can you believe the early 21st century people thought mrna vax would prevent disease vs just killing a bunch of people throng blood clots and strokes.
>>18578394>No, because the theory is that other people did the writing, maybe her companions, maybe other people in the circle.That blows this theory up now, several people have to be involved and aware that they are essentially committing fraud. This renders many of their discoveries in teaching blind people at the very least bunk, and at worse directly harmful. I can understand having a hostility to certain theories or academic preconceptions, but the existence of obvious bullshit in one area doesn't mean you need to take the scalpel to other unrelated topics and assume the same degree of bad faith. Take a look at this anon for example >>18578436 his frenetic and hysteric posts can be found all over this board, each a new iteration of some bad joke that he forgot the punchline to. This is the end result of rampant skepticism and why your algorithm feeds you constant noise that makes you doubt your entire world. Rise above.
>>18578482>That blows this theory up now, several people have to be involved and aware that they are essentially committing fraud.Yes. Fraud has happened a few times in history.>This renders many of their discoveries in teaching blind people at the very least bunk, and at worse directly harmfulFirst off, what discoveries are you talking about? Secondly, that's bad logic. If those discoveries turned out to work for future generations then great, they work. The rest of your post is just weird moralizing so I'll disregard it. Idk if you're the same anon but I still want elaboration on "a lot of things need to conveniently be true for her to be retarded"
>>18578501NTA but I mean nearly everyone who came into her life would have to consciously manipulate a woman incapable of even basic speech for pretty much all of their extremely public relationship with her, and never once act on their conscience. I could understand this if the stakes were high enough, absolutely, but a lie of that degree for no real perceivable benefit. It doesn't make much sense. I'll grant you that a lot of people seemed to die of heart attacks around her, and she seemed a bit easy to push in one direction or another politically, but that isn't evidence she was retarded, let alone proof.
>>18578516>NTA but I mean nearly everyone who came into her life would have to consciously manipulate a woman incapable of even basic speech for pretty much all of their extremely public relationship with herAlmost all of her communications with the world took place through three different consecutive companions. There isn't a public figure that your argument applies less to.And don't forget, the standard narrative is EXTREMELY incredible as well. Either a small handful of people kept a secret their entire lives, or a woman deafblind from infancy, who didn't learn language until 6 years old, learned how to understand and write eloquently about the world by having things finger-spelled into her hand by an untrained 20 year old (her first teaching job, in fact her first job of any kind). Literally the only reason that's easier to believe then "some people lied" is because we grew up learning about it.
>>18578520Your evidence is finding the character of her writing, works, public presence, and relationships suspicious. It's not impossible that you're right, but you need more than that to really conclusively say the woman was incapable of speech, or as you put it "severely retarded". I also was never taught about Hellen Keller.
>>18578529>but you need more than that to really conclusively say the woman was incapable of speech, or as you put it "severely retarded"like what?>I also was never taught about Hellen KellerOooook. You learned about her sometime and literally everyone knows who she is. Idk what your upbringing was like but they definitely teach her in schools dude
>>18578542A diagnosis, ideally. Barring that you could find some sort of primary source testimony that casts doubt on the conventional narrative. You can, as a sort of exercise, one which I'm sure you'll end up doing at some point in your secondary education, challenge an orthodox historical narrative. It does require evidence, and it really is more of an exercise most of the time, but I have full faith you are capable of it.
>>18578551>Barring that you could find some sort of primary source testimony that casts doubt on the conventional narrativesure, what if there was a primary source testimony that HK's dad called Anne Sullivan a fraud?
>>18578551>>18578553Also, a diagnosis? You said you were never taught about Hellen Keller. You know that she's been dead for a long time right?
>>18578516Things never go to far for psychopaths, they do such things, all the time. >>18578529The problem is that a lot of her supposed writing is highly visual or auditory, almost like a pastiche of deaf and blind experiences.
>>18578482Several people lol kys tard. For the vast majority it was Sullivan and her husband. Hk want taught standard signing/ formal language but basically a "secret code" by Sullivan. See koko the gorilla. Her primary feats are books that accredited her as the author, easily faked given that there is assist evidence of fraud likely by Sullivan in hk teen? Years. The truth is there has never been another hk in history, hell there hasn't been a single child devoid of language until they were 6 catch up to hk supposed language mastery.The writing accredited to hk seems highly improbable to be that of a blind from infancy person given all the colorful imagery but severe lack of her other 3 senses.
>>18578148>it's impossible to teach a deaf-blind person>she was coached
>>18578996Summer is the season of incredulity on 4channel, nothing we can do but wait it out.
>>18574897>the truth is uglyBehold the self-enslaving goyim!The strength of the united German people; the incompetence of communists; the servile patheticness of the negro—none of that is ugly. It is beautiful. Evertruth will not DRIVE PEOPLE TO THE BRINK OF INSANITY because it would have done so already, Darwin-sweep-the-ashes. But the non will flop if he thinks he can get away with it, which you are by your beliefs letting.>>18575254A tip o' m'fedora.>althoughbeit concerning to share an identical opinion with someone else
>>18578996Point to any other case where the student was completely deafblind since infancy.
>>18578553here it is btwhttps://www.disabilitymuseum.org/dhm/lib/detail.html?id=2473&&print=1&&page=56from a letter from HK to Dad>Now, kindest father in all the world, your child must say good-bye. I hope Christmas at home will be a very happy day, and that the new year will be full of brightness and joy for you and mother and everyone. Teacher would send her love if she were here. You must not call her a fraud and a humbug. She is my own precious teacher, you know. From your loving and absent child, HELEN A. KELLER. Odd thing to say.
Not american so never learned about her but OP has convinced me. The visual imagery in the posted excerpts is very strange for a person supposedly completely blind from early childhood.
So then there's the Frost King debacle, where "she" sent a story to her principal but it turns out it was pretty much a line-for-line paraphrase of an existing story. You can compare the two stories side by side herehttps://web.archive.org/web/20061204024310/http://www.afb.org/mylife/book.asp?ch=P3Ch5app2The standard story has it that Helen Keller actually had this story read to her 3 years prior, and it just laid dormant in her head until she unknowingly recreated it. I find this very hard to believe. The author of the original story was sympathetic and gave this comment that makes the proposal sound so outlandish it almost sounds sarcastic>What a wonderfully active and retentive mind that gifted child must have! If she had remembered and written down accurately, a short story, and that soon after hearing it, it would have been a marvel; but to have heard the story once, three years ago, and in such a way that neither her parents nor teacher could ever allude to it or refresh her memory about it, and then to have been able to reproduce it so vividly, even adding some touches of her own in perfect keeping with the rest, which really improve the original, is something that very few girls of riper age, and with every advantage of sight, hearing, and even great talents for composition, could have done as well, if at all.There was some weirdness around the incident, with Anne originally strongly denying she had ever read the story and saying that Sophia Hopkins must have read it to her on vacation; later evidence strongly suggested that Anne did read them to her. Her weird denial is another example of Anne being shady.
>>18571272Certainly more common than moon landings, though, right?
>>18579291More literate than you apparently.
>>18579536haha bazinga
>>18579500In the letter to her father it's Hellen saying this, not her father, and while somewhat interesting it is still not proof. >>18579500I did read about this one, but if Anne read it to her and then Hellen plagiarized the text, would that not indicate that Hellen could at least write and understand text? Really another point in the column for overstated intelligence but not complete retardation.
>>18579708>In the letter to her father it's Hellen saying this, not her father, and while somewhat interesting it is still not proof. What do you think she meant by it?>if Anne read it to her and then Hellen plagiarized the text, would that not indicate that Hellen could at least write and understand text?no, because my theory is that Anne wrote it.
I like this video about her.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_th1EszK34
>>18579804Ok but you see the logical jump right? Really the logical jump with all your posts and your entire theory. Who wrote her stuff?>Anne didWhy did she keep writing after Anne died?>She got another writerWhy did she have relationships, sometimes intimate ones, with other people?>They were the companions fabricating her ability to perceive the outside the worldHow did no one mention this ever?>They were all liarsHow was she able to find new liars so easily in spite of her severe retardation?>Her companionsEverything is built upon every story lining up perfectly, and never once do you present actual evidence for you claims, just circumstantial suspicion. It's typical of someone who has not yet thought about things academically, and I have a feeling you are probably underage, so I won't waste anymore of my time.
>>18579815For the sake of demonstrating good faith, can you also write up a similarly incredulous description of the official story?
>>18579815>Why did she keep writing after Anne died?>She got another writeras already established in this thread, "her" writing output slowed down prodigiously after Anne died, almost everything published afterwards was excerpts from her earlier writings with the exception of a biography of Anne that sounds like nothing she wrote before.>Why did she have relationships, sometimes intimate ones, with other people?Like who? I'll acknowledge Peter Fagan although that story is sus. Who else?>How did no one mention this ever?>They were all liarsYes. Like I said, people have lied before. In fact the number of people who have lied vastly outnumbers the number of accomplished people who were deafblind from infancy.>How was she able to find new liars so easily in spite of her severe retardation?Actually the only transition this applies to is Anne Sullivan to Polly Thomson. Polly was hired as Anne's secretary in 1914 and gradually took on more and more responsibility in their relationship, and took over as "interpreter" after Anne died. Her third companion Winnie Corbally was Polly's own nurse; by the time Polly died, Helen had had several strokes and was no longer writing, touring, or communicating with anyone, so there's really no chicanery required from her.So that's three people required to maintain a ruse, and that includes Peter Fagan who neither of us has really done any reading on.>Everything is built upon every story lining up perfectly, and never once do you present actual evidence for you claims blah blah blahWeird temper tantrum. There is plenty of evidence in this thread already, and I think I'm responding factually to things you're actually saying here. If I'm wrong about anything I'm saying, point it out, but your argument just seems to be "there's a lot of logical jumps in this theory", which applies to the official story as well.
>>18579818>>18579836It would be one thing if this was ancient history, where there is more room for reading into what scattered documentation we have. As it stands the burden of proof is on you, and you have failed to demonstrate proof for much of anything.
>>18579855I've cited several primary sources that call the official story into question. What would constitute proof for you?
>>18579855Yes, it would be one thing if this was ancient history, but Hellen Keller lived until 1968, and yet there is BARELY any footage of her. Everybody in America knows her name and presumably did then as well, since she visited with every sitting president from Cleveland to LBJ. Doesn't that seem weird?
>>18579836I like the way you break things down anon. Every once in a while I come across an unrelentingly autistic debater on 4chan and it reminds me why I come here. Im convinced.
>>18580272Thanks fren. I didn't make this thread to be a masterdebater but I suppose I'm falling into it now. Genuinely I want to know if there is an actual, good reason to believe the standard Helen Keller story. People here are actually good at dismantling dumb historical revisionism (sometimes) and I want to know if I'm delusional on this, but I genuinely don't buy any of the arguments itt so far.That, and it's fun to share the thought. I had never even considered this possibility until hearing a PKA clip 4 years ago; all it took was a single person to point out "hey this story doesn't really make sense". And if true, it's pretty fucked that we drill it into every schoolchild's head.Didn't really start looking into things in earnest until shortly before making this thread. I've teetered over revisionist rabbit holes before but been pulled back by actually looking into stuff. But this time, the more I read, the LESS I believe the official story. There is just straight up no way that the thoughts in Story of my Life actually came from Helen Keller, it's fascinating to read with a skeptical eye. The bits from >>18578169 >>18578181 >>18578396 are from picrel which is an interesting read so far (it also implies that Helen's sudden change of demeanor from wild child to angel involved Anne physically disciplining her a lot).
>>18580294lol picrel
>>18580294Im always looking for good revisionism and conspiracy theories because its extraordinarily rare I find any with any credibility. I don't want to derail your thread but you might find this interesting. https://youtu.be/s_aNH4hXz8I?si=_N_u5bWBXkP_8bN0Its fascinating the way people get comfortable believing something. And it becomes orthodox thought, and its like pulling teeth to get people to be skeptical. Even if its not religious but about education or science. I feel like within a few years it will be commonly accepted this was fraud in the same way its commonly accepted that the Koko gorilla studies were wishful thinking.
>>18580310Yeah I think so as well. Renews my faith in the concept of the internet -- the kids all learned something from TikTok that their teacher says is wrong, and this time TikTok might be right. The buttmad teacher reactions are hilarious, they like to think they teach critical thinking but when their students get skeptical of Helen Keller it's "SHE WAS REAL DAMN IT TRUST ME". Now that I think about it, the fact that it's such a third rail is a red flag itself.It'll definitely be a bigger paradigm shift than Koko the Gorilla, it's never been nearly this inflammatory to doubt Koko and she really is a huge part of the curriculum. When a Texas school board tried to remove her in 2018 it was a national news story. Hopefully if the cards collapse, there's some introspection about that.
This is a bizarre recollection from Mark Twain. Is he bullshitting? Or was she not actually deafblind? Or legitimately telepathic like he's suggesting?
I guess Helen Keller destroyed the braille manuscript of Story of my Life, somehow and for some reason
>>18580347I'm sure she learned her lesson, and we have braille manuscripts for her later works.
