techstepgenr8tion
that chatty American
Joined: Feb 07, 2005
Posts: 14832
Location: A beautiful vector among many
|
 Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 3:56 pm Post subject: Risks of obliterating 'normal'? |
 |
|
I was in another thread when I realized I had a topic that I think would be great to have here.
The question is ultimately this: by denormalizing everything, by assigning an 'ism' to almost any human behavior (starting from different modes of sexuality - even modes within modes - and working outward to all kinds of other things) that we may essentially cause a 'heat death' for cohesive society as we know it?
I'm not meaning to be so forboding as to suggest that it would cause anarchy, collapse, or even ice cold indifference to fellow human beings, but it seems like conceptually exploding the normal curve and deleting the middle just by assigning everyone too many isms for such a thing to exist anymore - essentially we're just shifting goalposts, changing definitions, but at the same time these are remarkably powerful definitions we're working with.
What do you think are the benefits? What do you think are the perils? Would the perils outweigh the benefits in your opinion or would the benefits outweigh the perils? |
|
| Back to top |
|
YippySkippy
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 27, 2011
Posts: 1520
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 4:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I think the main benefactors would/will be the pharmacutical industry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
techstepgenr8tion
that chatty American
Joined: Feb 07, 2005
Posts: 14832
Location: A beautiful vector among many
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 4:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lol, but how to do you get anyone to take medication when there's no standard? |
|
| Back to top |
|
snapcap
Phoenix
Joined: Oct 13, 2011
Age: 31
Posts: 2328
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The main benefactors would be the pocket dictionary industry.
The losers in it would be trees.
Ultimately, it sounds absurd.
_________________
*some atheist walks outside and picks up stick*
some atheist to stick: "You're like me!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
techstepgenr8tion
that chatty American
Joined: Feb 07, 2005
Posts: 14832
Location: A beautiful vector among many
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 4:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| snapcap wrote: | The main benefactors would be the pocket dictionary industry.
The losers in it would be trees.
|
Wow, I think that might just be the perfect answer - and it came within two posts of the OP.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
snapcap
Phoenix
Joined: Oct 13, 2011
Age: 31
Posts: 2328
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Behold, NT brains!
*Demonstrates brains*
You forgot to quote the absurd part.
_________________
*some atheist walks outside and picks up stick*
some atheist to stick: "You're like me!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
Janissy
Phoenix
Joined: May 06, 2009
Age: 46
Posts: 4853
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 4:42 pm Post subject: Re: Risks of obliterating 'normal'? |
|
|
| techstepgenr8tion wrote: | | What do you think are the benefits? What do you think are the perils? Would the perils outweigh the benefits in your opinion or would the benefits outweigh the perils? |
Perils
Overmedication and the idea that literally everything that every person does is somehow mentally unhealthy
Benefits
Neurodiversity becomes a default. To paraphrase The Incredibles, when everybody is different, nobody is different.
I think the perils outweight the benfits, especially the overmedication part. |
|
| Back to top |
|
techstepgenr8tion
that chatty American
Joined: Feb 07, 2005
Posts: 14832
Location: A beautiful vector among many
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Meh, never been a believer in spectrumite intellectual supremacy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
techstepgenr8tion
that chatty American
Joined: Feb 07, 2005
Posts: 14832
Location: A beautiful vector among many
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 4:46 pm Post subject: Re: Risks of obliterating 'normal'? |
|
|
| Janissy wrote: |
Benefits
Neurodiversity becomes a default. To paraphrase The Incredibles, when everybody is different, nobody is different. |
And any local board of education would mimic US Congress. |
|
| Back to top |
|
YippySkippy
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 27, 2011
Posts: 1520
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 4:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Trees? Wha...? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Janissy
Phoenix
Joined: May 06, 2009
Age: 46
Posts: 4853
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| techstepgenr8tion wrote: | | Lol, but how to do you get anyone to take medication when there's no standard? |
Multiple standards. Everybody will meet at least some of the standards. Nobody will meet all of them. So people get medicated for whichever of the standards they don't meet. This already happens to some extent in general medicine. By the time you get to my age (middle age) many people are on at least one medication for one physical standard they don't meet, whether it be cholesterol, triglycerides, blood pressure, blood sugar. Nobody fails to meet all the standards but many don't meet at least one. The same could happen for mental health. |
|
| Back to top |
|
techstepgenr8tion
that chatty American
Joined: Feb 07, 2005
Posts: 14832
Location: A beautiful vector among many
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Not everyone is willing to reach into the grab bag of side-effects though. I know they've been talking about getting people who have genetic cholesterol risks on statons by the age of 8 or 10 but - it makes a lot more sense for physical health than mental because we know what we're doing is - psychologically at least - developmentally neutral. With psychiatric meds its a much more complicated world. |
|
| Back to top |
|
snapcap
Phoenix
Joined: Oct 13, 2011
Age: 31
Posts: 2328
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 5:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| techstepgenr8tion wrote: | | Meh, never been a believer in spectrumite intellectual supremacy. |
I may not be on the AS, but I don't think I have NT brains either. I have MT brains.
_________________
*some atheist walks outside and picks up stick*
some atheist to stick: "You're like me!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
YippySkippy
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 27, 2011
Posts: 1520
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 10:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nevermind, I get the tree thing now.
I'm thick sometimes.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
edgewaters
hibernating
Joined: Aug 17, 2006
Age: 40
Posts: 2426
Location: Ontario
|
| Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 12:32 am Post subject: Re: Risks of obliterating 'normal'? |
|
|
| techstepgenr8tion wrote: | | The question is ultimately this: by denormalizing everything, by assigning an 'ism' to almost any human behavior (starting from different modes of sexuality - even modes within modes - and working outward to all kinds of other things) that we may essentially cause a 'heat death' for cohesive society as we know it? |
This is basically what the book Future Shock was all about, though the concept there was a bit more expansive. He was talking about more than just defining (though that was part of it), he was talking about the complete fragmentation of society into sub-cultures and the loss of a common experience. |
|
| Back to top |
|
