Cheap oil, globalization, etc & the Neanderthal Theory

Post Reply New Topic

There is no assumption chaining, and it is clearly falsifiable. Just because neurodiversity cannot be exxplained by a single cause or mutation, but needs 100s or even 1000s of different traits in order to explain, does not mean it is assumption chaining. The Neanderthal theory predicts that neurodiversity is very complex, and cannot be simplified down to one mutation or cause. Instead, we will have differences in every part of human behavior linked to neurodiversity, and these traits will be linked. That's two assumptions that are not chained, and that are directly falsifiable.

Because that's how neurodiversity is predicted to function, it directly follows that in order to get anywhere, there is a need to provide new hypotheses for how each and every aspect of neurodiversity. These are not directly part of the Neanderthal theory (even if some are presented), but are related to how further research needs to be done. For example, one hypothesis could construct the social behavior of neurodiversity and show that it is consistent (predicted by Neanderthal theory, falsifiable). Another might explain how neurodiverse communication works, and why people with ASD have problems with neurotypical communication (the Neanderthal theory predicts consistent communication as this is part of every species). A third alternative is to provide a hypothesis about how the neurodiverse mating behavior works, and show that it is consistent.

[Note: scientific neurodiversity (based on Aspie-quiz and Neanderthal Theory) abbreviated as "sci ND"]

When I wrote what I wrote, I am not sure what I was thinking. We don't have firm figures for either scientific neurodiversity or mental injury. I'm not even sure neurotypicals can't get diagnosed with some forms of mental "illness." When, as I understand it, sci ND could be between 10 and 40% (though the high end is rather unlikely) and mixed 10-20%, and mental "illness" among children is 13-20% according to the CDC, it is hard to calculate anything. Obviously, if sci ND is 40% and mixed 20% the mistreatment shouldn't exist as NTs would be a minority. Even at the low end, it shouldn't happen. I once heard, it usually only takes 20% to object to a policy to stop it, so even at these levels, it shouldn't be happening.

If we assume 20% mental "illness" among children, 10% sci ND, 10% mixed and 0% mental "illness" among NTs, we have a 100% rate of mental injury among sci ND children already at the low end (of sci ND / mixed prevalence) and most pessimistic of assumptions.

If we assume 13% mental "illness" among children, 20% sci ND, 20% mixed and 0% mental "illness" among NTs, we have a 32.5% rate of mental injury among sci ND children at the highest *reasonable* guesstimate of sci ND / mixed prevalence and optimistic assumptions. Even if mental injury among NTs isn't quite zero, the percentage is still high.

Bottom line: It is hard to tell if most sci ND people are coping well still or not but even under the most optimistic assumptions the situation is dire.