Page 8 of 8 [ 121 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

Danielismyname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Apr 2007
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,565

24 Sep 2008, 2:30 am

Got you (I forgot this was in relation to the theory that this thread pertains to, and that it's people with "aspie" traits that is more important).

It'd be interesting to see how those with a definite diagnosis compare to those with traits in relation to outcome with the "aspie quiz" (outcome equating to the lack of marriage/"serious" relationships for example), and to see if it's much different from professional studies (I'm betting it won't be much different, but that's me betting).



DeepBlueLake
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 9 Mar 2007
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 92
Location: North of England

24 Sep 2008, 8:07 am

While I doubt there's any Neanderthal DNA in modern humans, there's a more general historical reason for disbelieving the theory.

Whenever two societies collide or compete over some resource, the more autistic society tends to win, unless they're hopelessly outnumbered. Consider...

Romans over Barbarians

Saxons over Celts

Normans over Saxons

Sunni over Shiite

Protestant over Catholic

European over African

Cowboys over Indians

Union over Confederacy


Those who raise their heads highest out of the human dreamworld to breathe the cold, clear air of mind - those who talk only in facts and truth, with their mouths - they prevail. And the romantic children of nature, the eye-talkers, exquisitely intuitive? They...umm...don't.

In a protracted competition, even a very slight edge would give an advantage. Minds that had crawled just a few inches more towards what we now call literacy could plan better. Invent better weapons. Create new strategies that intuition simply can't.

After many centuries of co-existence, modern humans seem to have edged the Neanderthals out. Given the above scoresheet, I'm tempted to think the Neanderthals were the less autistic group.

I'd also like to address the question of mating. Autistic people find relationships hard nowadays because they are

<Oprah Winfrey> "relationships" </Oprah Winfrey>

rather than functional partnerships for childrearing. They are based on the mutual tickling of ego against ego, for little more than narcissistic satisfaction. That world is fine for the extrovert, even the sociopath - but for the introverted and autistic, it is a dreary, difficult place to navigate.

Thing is, that world didn't really exist before the 1960's. It has popped up a couple of times through history, usually when a civilisation is in decline. But for the rest of the time, relationships have been less about getting it on, and more about getting on with it. There's crops to get in, babies to feed. Got to get the shelter built for wintertime. No time to wonder if you and I complete each other.

Another aspect of the older society is arranged marriages. Parents selected their children's partners based on a far longer experience of how people work and what traits turn out to be more valuable in the long run. The ability to make smalltalk was seldom taken into account. Yes, there are a lot of problems and pain with arranged marriages, but as we're finding out today, the alternative can hurt as well. A ruthless market of the flesh, where barbarian values rule and no thought of tomorrow is ever taken.

You've seen it, right? The barely-concealed sneer that looks down at you from glamorous adverts. Are you good enough for me?

The drunken nightclubs - sex, fights and vomiting all swirling around each other. And over it all, the stink of mutual contempt. Okay...until I find something better...

Believe it or not, this kind of culture is a rarity.

And believe it or not, the definition of mere introversion as autism, as pathology; that's a truly recent thing.

Before the twentieth century only the extreme, debilitating forms of autism were recognised. Anyone with a milder form was simply a normal person. Taciturn, maybe. Withdrawn, possibly. Eccentric, perhaps. But still people, getting on with their callings in life. Nobody talked about "autistic statesman Thomas Jefferson", or "autistic scientist Albert Einstein". They were just who they were.

Nobody looked down on geeks. In many periods, they were celebrated - Benjamin Franklin, Isambard Kingdom Brunel, or their fictional counterparts, Sherlock Holmes and Phileas Fogg. Nowadays such passionate bringers of order out of chaos would get new letters added to their qualifications; ASD, ADHD, OCD and so on. Changes in society and its values have ended that great age of the lone eccentric, with his machines of sober greyness, and buildings designed to last forever.

But who brought the Stone Age to an end, do you think?

Consider a hunter, the foremost of his tribe. And standing next to him, the runt. If this hadn't been such an unusually abundant land, he'd have been killed as wastage like runts often are. He does not fight, does not talk to girls, just looks, looks, looks. He looks and plays with everything he comes across. They laugh at him, especially when he does things like try to cook stones on the fire.

But today is different.

Today he hands the hunter an arrow made from something within those rocks. Something only he knows about. This arrow has a tip that glitters like the sun. It's its not bone or flint, but -

"Oh!"

- the hunter pulls his thumb back - it's so sharp!

The hunter draws his bow and takes careful aim at a deer.

WHUCK.

The deer falls without a sound. Instead of just embedding, the arrowhead has gone straight through, killing cleanly and instantly.

"Make some more for the tribe," the hunter says, "and you shall have a share of the good food and the good living."

"All right," says the runt.

The hunter grasps the runt's hand.

"My name is Jones," he says.

"My name is Smith," says the runt. "Welcome to the Bronze Age."



BTW, I'm not any kind of autistic supremacist. I'm proud to be autistic, and I consider autism to be a vital part of human life. But we're just one ingredient in the mix, and other types of mind are just as important.



Last edited by DeepBlueLake on 24 Sep 2008, 2:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Tahitiii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jul 2008
Age: 68
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,214
Location: USA

24 Sep 2008, 10:25 am

DeepBlueLake wrote:
BTW, I'm not any kind of autistic supremacist. I'm proud to be autistic, and I consider autism to be a vital part of human life. But we're just one ingredient in the mix, and other types of mind are just as important.
I would have expressed it differently. I want to quibble with a thousand details. (Call me an Aspie.) But yes, that's essentially how it is. Unfortunately, at this moment in history, the big guy doesn't understand how it works and wants to kill the golden goose.

DeepBlueLake wrote:
Those who raise their heads highest out of the human dreamworld to breathe the cold, clear air of mind - those who talk only in facts and truth...
Unfortunately, while drinking in the cold, crisps facts, I'm also catching the stench of the big guy himself. Even when I lay low and say nothing, they can sense the presence of a natural-born whistle-blower.


_________________
Occupy Everything!


MathThinkerSpain
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 53
Location: Spain

25 Sep 2008, 7:52 am

MathThinkerSpain wrote:
Latest Scientist findings assure interbreed happened in small amount:

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/in ... 351AAA6dpE

That is true that Near. did not survive so long, last survivors at Gibraltar about 24.000 years.

Out of probing this question:
The big difference between Nearthental and modern humans, was that the Neart. moved in small groups and did not socialize.

They were more experts and a much bigger brain, even survived more thousands of years, they had better skills and much stronger bodies than Modern Humans. Smarter Nearthental did not survive. Or maybe they mixed in small porcentage.

AS far I readm, I think that Modern human defeated Neart. in the competition of limited resources (as Modern populations grew), as they could manage to socialize into bigger tribal groups.


Jumping a big GAP, It is similar to a globalized society where the individual AS, has a smaller role, as ideas flow round the world, Many-ASers keep alive involving in its own egoism.

Also, it is important the brain size of modern humans is getting smaller after thousand of years. And this video where they say that human are getting less skilled, and less intelligent after the years.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ON13a5OwD8

Maybe we move into more "brilliant",INTEligent society but a less-brained social man. :(

That are bad news for traditional-AS Homo survival, in general. Bad any case is different, maybe you are luckier. May be an non-traditional but modern-AS will come?

All what I see are general Hypotesis that could be probed or not.
Thanks :P
Edit:
"Detailed comparison of Neanderthal skeletal remains with those of modern humans have shown that there is nothing in Neanderthal anatomy that conclusively indicates locomotor, manipulative, intellectual, or linguistic abilities inferior to those of modern humans."
Erik Trinkaus, "Hard Times Among the Neanderthals,"
Natural History, 87:10, p. 58
Not talking of social issues?

anna-banana wrote:
MathThinkerSpain wrote:
Also, it is important the brain size of modern humans is getting smaller after thousand of years. And this video where they say that human are getting less skilled, and less intelligent after the years.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ON13a5OwD8

I can't believe you tricked me to watch this creationist BS :?


It is not one INFO but two different INFOs which are related:

1.-the brain size of modern humans is getting smaller after thousand of years. It is probed and accurate INFO, you can find scientific news everywhere since a long time ago. So I will not give any link for something obvious.
I do not know if the brain involution could be related to NTs or to ASers, or both. It should be for NTs and ASers, this extra INFO I cannot find. Is there a comparative between ASers brain size and NTs, nowadays? it should be the same.
About evolution of brain, after Agricultural/non-hunting civilization till nowAdays, the dates are after Humans got some quiet "sofas" to sit on, I think it is increasing rate after TV discovery. :).


2.- The Video Info I do not think it is accurate, it is related to point one, but I do not support it, it is only something "interesting".
Brain size doesnot mean intelligence, one how many cubic centimeters bigger is a brain, it could be used better or worse. You can have a ferrary and keep going 10km per hour. It is related to a bigger number of neurones and neurone connections.

Male Brain size is bigger than female brain size, and females are very smart. Do not forget males have had an inter-specie competition for getting the bets female, and also hunting wild animals was for males. That all helped to keep the male darwinian evolution big sized. Think or dye, that is the question!!
Nowadays, not thinking is something good, and only some kind of social "relationship" is more important than thinking for survival. That is something ASers should think about, Many-ASers keep alive involving in its own egoism.


_________________
AS children we got bullyed by children. AS Adults we got bullyed by "Autism-Speaks".
Psychologist. I categorize AS vs NT. Need a diagnose? PM for an On-line Dx


MathThinkerSpain
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 53
Location: Spain

25 Sep 2008, 8:13 am

rdos wrote:
Yes, this is part of the problem for general acceptance for the Neanderthal theory. Not only does it connect ASDs and Neanderthals, but it also has huge implications for our understanding of races and differences between races. It also affects our views of human evolution and our "purity" and superiority over other species. Because of this I find it unlikely the theory will get acceptance in any near future.

Any probed theory could be accepted even if it is not "fine". There could be many collateral problems, anyway. And it could be something which could be difficult for the society racism.

Science have been allways fighting against it. Tell Galileo, newton, etc....

I would not call it "superiority" but difference, we should go away of racist but scientist thinking in any direction.
They are investigating hard about genoma, and there are no severe racist problems, :)

Are this links here racist? http://espectroautista.googlepages.com/bap.html


_________________
AS children we got bullyed by children. AS Adults we got bullyed by "Autism-Speaks".
Psychologist. I categorize AS vs NT. Need a diagnose? PM for an On-line Dx


Loborojo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Aug 2008
Age: 64
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 1,242
Location: Negombo

25 Sep 2008, 11:24 am

Danielismyname wrote:
rdos wrote:
Your statistics are very probably totally false. :wink:

The truth is, people doing Aspie-quiz reproduce at about the same rate as NTs. They do have higher divorce statistics, but it is far from 90%.


I know for a fact that the stats for the rate of marriage are accurate for Asperger's (2 to 30%), and HFA (effectively none at all, barring statistical outliers); I read the papers, and they're accurate so far as the diagnosed population goes (rather than people who think they have AS/HFA by taking a test online).

I'll have a look for any papers involving divorce rates later on (it'll be with diagnosed people, which is how it should be).

O, and what's the rate of diagnosis of those who've taken the "aspie quiz" that you use in your "studies" (I'm assume that it is 100% in relation to your "NT" control group)?


testing 47 people and basing stats on that is way to low


_________________
Your Aspie score: 152 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 48 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie


Loborojo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Aug 2008
Age: 64
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 1,242
Location: Negombo

25 Sep 2008, 11:46 am

Something else...why do we believe that native americans or afro Americans would have e lesser % of As? Id internet to check it out so easily avialble for them? I cannot believe that everyone from disadvantaged cultures, impoverished due to racial prejudice, would have a computer?

The fact that not many people have knowledge of As is another factor (don't assume that every NT knows what autism is let alone Asperger!) that contributes to the lack of good stats.

How many find the Aspie quiz or the way to a good diganosis???

Stroke of luck...had I not met the person (who happened to have worked with Aspergers) last year, I would never have known, and I don't believe in coincidence (that I met her and she told me), it had to happen and now everything makes sense. there isn't a day that goes by since I knew it that I have not stopped wondering, analysing my past and explain symptons and relationships that went awry and up to the point that I realise that my mum is Aspie too (she was called nutter by my dad during my childhood). Many symptons I recognise in her are AS, I think.

But now she is in a home for the elderly, after she suffered a brain stroke. She is not paralyzed and can still think and speak normally. But I think would it still be helpful to do the test with her? Should I write a letter to her saying:" whatever my dad called you...it is not true, you were never mad, you had Asperger..."?

Sorry for digressing so much...


_________________
Your Aspie score: 152 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 48 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie


Last edited by Loborojo on 25 Sep 2008, 5:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Callista
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,775
Location: Ohio, USA

25 Sep 2008, 1:54 pm

If you want to talk about whether autism is a desirable trait, you don't really look at the low-functioning population, anyway. As far as passing on autistic traits goes, the people who are affected so strongly that they don't marry and reproduce aren't the ones you're interested in. It's the much larger population of mild AS, mild autism, and NT with autistic traits that keeps autism in the gene pool. A small amount of autism in someone who isn't greatly disabled by its presence is an advantage because it allows for narrow focus and persistence--the sort of traits that benefit the whole society. Traits that are beneficial to society get passed on even if the people who have the extreme versions can't reproduce.

Here's a physical condition that mimics this: Sickle-cell anemia. The mutation developed in Africa, where malaria is a big danger. It's a pretty simple condition, genetically, not like autism; have one gene, and you end up with sickle-cell trait; two, and you get the full-blown condition. Having one gene protects you from malaria. Having two, in the many years before we learned to treat it, can be deadly. The mutation stuck around because it was so useful in its milder form--people who could survive malaria, despite the drawbacks of sickle-cell trait, survived longer to produce more children with the same trait. That's similar to autism in that the cases that don't allow reproduction still occur because "a touch of autism" involves the same genetic traits and is beneficial to an individual and/or his community.

Note that I don't think mild AS makes you superior; rather, it makes you specialized in doing things many NTs aren't extremely good at. A community with Aspies in it is stronger because of its diversity, with more resources than a community with just NTs or just Aspies would be. We may be getting more selection for mild AS or NT-with-autistic-traits because of the new opportunities afforded by technology in almost all areas of life.


_________________
Reports from a Resident Alien:
http://chaoticidealism.livejournal.com

Autism Memorial:
http://autism-memorial.livejournal.com


rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,089
Location: Sweden

25 Sep 2008, 2:54 pm

Exactly, Callista. You don't want to study disabling autism, you would want to study mild AS or autistic traits, which is what the Aspie-quiz study did, and it made the conclusion that these traits seems to be involved in "balanced selection", because both NTs and Aspies reproduced in similar amounts.