In “Autistic Spectrum, Normal Variation, and Harmful Dysfunction,” Denis Forest focuses on the example of autism to challenge key components of HDA, namely, the evolutionary background of the function/dysfunction distinction and the link between harm and value. Forest observes that it is true that some psychological theories have tried to explain autism through the malfunction of specific, evolved mental mechanisms or modules, and on this basis, it could be argued that HDA and explanatory theories of autism are in complete harmony. However, autism research is more concerned with the ontogeny of mental mechanisms than with their evolutionary origin. In the context of the neurodiversity movement, which claims that we should consider autism as an instance of normal variation in human populations, it is difficult to see how HDA could tell us when behavioral and cognitive differences should be understood in terms of underlying dysfunction and when they are not. Moreover, confronted with the heterogeneity of cases within the autism spectrum, we want to highlight the difference between autism’s harmless and harmful features. But what makes a dysfunction harmful is its intrinsic detrimental consequences, not the fact that it would be disvalued in a given social context. Recent shifts in the representation of high-order autism do not change a disorder into a healthy condition; they unmask abilities that had previously remained undetected. In the context of autism and neurodiversity, we need other criteria of dysfunction and harm than those specified by HDA.