zlacker

[parent] [thread] 4 comments
1. bitwiz+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-12-06 20:30:57
> I think it’s safe to say that if someone appears “weird” to the hive mind of a community, that person is more likely to be correctly diagnosed.

It's officially frowned upon, but doctors still use the term "FLK" (for "funny looking kid") to describe babies or children with nonspecific facial deformities, which are pretty reliable indicators of cognitive or learning disability even if the doctor can't put his finger on what the deformity actually is.

> This only applies to high-functioning categories of behaviors. But I’ve found that more often than not, it’s the social reaction of groups that is the problem for high-functioning autists, and less the autism itself. Maybe neurotypical behavior or neurotypical mindedness is the disease because I don’t understand why or how some people find it so hard to think differently. Are they not individuals, are they zombies?

It's the uncanny valley effect. I'm convinced that one of our primal atavistic fears, besides snakes, spiders, and so forth, is "something evil or hostile disguised as one of our own". In the EEA this fear would have protected a community against spies, as well as profoundly sick (e.g. rabies) individuals who risked spreading their disease throughout the whole village. Different cultures give different names to creatures of this sort: vampire, zombie, changeling, skinwalker, bakemono, etc.

Profoundly autistic people are clearly disabled, and so attract nurturing and care; "high functioning" autistic people resemble humans who can function independently, but their behavior is different enough to trigger what I call the Kendrick Lamar response ("they not like us, they not like us") and hence are viewed with fear and suspicion. It's a flaw in the neurotypical mindset born of a trait that helped preserve neurotypical communities against invasion or outbreak, but it's not very specific so others get caught in its dragnet.

That's my idea anyway. Maybe I'm just steelmanning the NT perspective. There has to be a reason why the poor blighters are the way they are...

replies(1): >>nis0s+R1
2. nis0s+R1[view] [source] 2025-12-06 20:50:19
>>bitwiz+(OP)
> There has to be a reason why the poor blighters are the way they are...

Maybe I am biased, but to me NT appear as cognitively lazy. They don’t question norms or standards, unless those norms or standards interfere with their feed-fuck cycles.

replies(1): >>bitwiz+vc
◧◩
3. bitwiz+vc[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-06 22:28:12
>>nis0s+R1
They come built in with a set of heuristics that help them interact with other NT minds very well with very little cognitive effort, so why spend it if you don't need to? There's a certain perverse genius to it which you'd see if you spend any time around profoundly NT people: for example those who fit the "theatre kid" archetype, or even skilled marketers. They can shape the trajectory of an interpersonal relationship in real time as easily as we breathe.

Expending large amounts of cognitive effort to better understand and deal with others can be exhausting. We do it because we have to just to survive. The benefit is we have a lot of uncommitted neural capacity potentially freed up for other things, like experimenting with computers. But it's a stiff price to pay, and in the EEA it's advantageous to be able to participate in a cohesive group without thinking much about it. Our brains are our most energy-hungry organs, and sustenance could get scarce...

replies(1): >>nis0s+ft
◧◩◪
4. nis0s+ft[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-07 00:49:24
>>bitwiz+vc
It depends on the task at hand, that unspoken understanding can work against your best interests. In general, the NT way leads to stagnation and complacency for building and maintaining systems as conditions change. I am not saying one way of thinking is better than the other, you bring up a great point about conserving resources. I think survival pressures have always necessitated a balance of human cognitive abilities. I guess only time can tell how things may transpire, and what’s actually useful. Maybe there’s a way to simulate this in silico…
replies(1): >>bitwiz+fu
◧◩◪◨
5. bitwiz+fu[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-07 01:00:16
>>nis0s+ft
For thousands of years, the way humans lived changed so slowly as to be imperceptible. That's no longer the case. Starry-eyed types who think of their autistic children as "indigo" or "crystal" children may wax poetic about autism being the next phase of human evolution, but recent scientific work lends a kernel of credence to that: autism is now thought to be one of the side effects of rapid changes to our brains that were evolutionarily necessary to cope with our rapidly changing world and circumstances.
[go to top]