A Society of ASDs

Post Reply New Topic

If it were a simple matter of environment those of us with NT siblings wouldnt have problems.

Aspies are pretty diverse. What's true for one might not be true for all.

Me, I've never had any success at all trying to improve my social interaction skills. Several other people here have reported that with training and practice, they've improved. I won't say they haven't.

Natural selection works with us the same as any other species. If you have heritable variation and non-random differential reproductive output, you've got natural selection.

I don't think it means much to say one person is smarter than another. Intelligence takes a lot of forms.

"Natural selection works with us the same as any other species. If you have heritable variation and non-random differential reproductive output, you've got natural selection."

quote from Canyonwind.


Yep it's true we still have natural selection. But on the whole the human race no longer has evolution. The gene pool is stagnating according to most scientists. It's due to a few factors. All due to our current lifestyle for which we are not really evolved to be doing.

I'm currently writing a short story on eugenics, i'm just going to copy and paste a part of it here to explain what i mean.

"But i digress, i'm getting old, old and tired, my mind wanders a little more than it used too. So why don't i bring you up to speed then sonny? Show you what i think was the cause, oh it's not the blame, but it was the spark.
Now i can't be sure exactly what lead us down the path we did but i can see what stopped you. In the 1930's in both our worlds a form of social philosiphy was starting to gain acceptance. Eugenics; selective breeding of humanity for the benefit of society. It's an old idea, Plato himself was a proponent, however it gained a modern distinction with a cousin of Charles Darwin. Noting that humanities newfound ability too care for the sick and provide enough food for the weak, man had stopped evolving, survival of the fittest, the new paradigm of understanding was being thwarted by humanities new condition. Now those which would have previously perished in nature where kept alive by modern medicines and social conditions, and in fact it was noted that those of a less desireable nature (most notably the poor and unintelligent) where having the most children while those of higher class were having the least. A sort off downward spiral was imagined whereby humanties gene pool would degenerate as the weaker parts of it would begin to outnumber the stronger parts leading to a stagnantation of the race. So in 1937 in both our worlds governments all around the world, including europe, america and asia started to pass eugenics laws. Laws promoting what where considered "desireables" to breed and laws preventing "degenerates" to breed. Our respective governments even carried out hundreds of thousands of forced sterlizations on those deemed "unworthy". In my world that continued into the late 80's, on this one it was the 70's. We stopped for different reasons though."

Just for the record, i do not approve of eugenics, my story is a cautionary tale about it just in case anyone was wondering what i'm doing researching all this stuff.

Why is it that anytime anyone mentions eugenics they have to start with the "forced sterilization" talk?

Theres more than one way to do anything.. if population control laws were passed (as they should be) limiting the number of children a couple can have to say 2 then would rewarding those who have made significant contributions to science or the furtherment of humanity with special permission to have 3 or more children be considered evil?

But that would be eugenics and eugenics equals evil, right?

I don't think eugenics is evil, but it certainly has the potential to go horribly wrong.

There are so many possibilities some sort of public discourse by governmental types should be started on it i think.

What happens when we can adjust genes too make people, healthier? smarter? etc etc. Do we?
Does the government pay for it? What if only the rich can afford it? Fastforward 3000 years and then humanity will have a class system based on genetics as well as money... or we could end up losing diversity and then get hit by some killer virus.

I agree that eugenics is not inherently evil, but it is potentially.

Hmm... gotta split a couple hairs on this one. The human race IS "evolving". However, it is not doing so according to the same rules that it had before. Babies that previously would have been "selected against"-- i.e., that would have died-- are now growing up and having kids, passing their genes along. There are entire families that have genes for certain kinds of cancer.... but now they have the cancer removed and pass their genes along.

"Natural Selection", on the other hand, is a thing of the past.

Well its either that or continue to devolve and watch civilization fall apart.

But then again the fall of civilization and the exinction of the human race is about 99% assured regardless of what we do (short of genetic alteration to remove the self-destructive tendancies which will never happen.. NTs hold them so very dear for some reason) so whats the point?

And I wouldnt call the propogation of damaged genetics through the species as "evolving" per say.

Evolution by definition requires the mutation to have some benefit for survival or improvement of the species capabilities.

Civilizations fall. European civilization decayed while Muslim civilization thrived during the Dark Ages.

As far as extinction? I highly doubt it. Even assuming a massive depopulation, the race is just a little too spread out. The "worst case" scenario is that the survivors would have to give up their specialised lives and return to the hunter-gatherer phase. This would probably be good for us, genetically, as it would return natural selection into the picture. We'd shrink in numbers for a generation or two, then we'd start multiplying like rabbits again.

Good point re: natural selection/evolution.

I'd also have to say i also think it unlikely the human race will make itself truly extinct. I wouldn't rule out another dark age or three but true extinction is probably unlikely atm.

Course it depends on wether or not and when we manage to start colonising space. We could get hit by a meteor monyana man, or some such cataclysm. I won't consider us truly out of the woods till we're not all on the same planet.

Saying we are exempt (or nearly exempt) from evolution is like saying we are exempt from gravity because we have machines that can make us fly. Evolution and selection are not options, they are as much a part of the universe as Pi is.

Not just a feminist but also a totalitarian at heart I see; not suprising as the two go very well together. But that's ok, feminists/"liberals" and the like are not having as many babies as conservatives are. Children for the most part believe and vote what their parents do. So in the long run American "liberals" (who are not really liberal) are going to lose becuase conservatives are going to out-breed them.

Evolution FTW.

The radical of one century is the conservative of the next. The radical invents the views. When he has worn them out the conservative adopts them.

Oh, we're not exempt from evolution. But selection on the other hand.... most of the forces of "natural selection" have been cancelled out. We still have selection, but it's totally different than the "natural selection" that affects any other species. We've even lessened the power of stupidity by putting warning labels on everything, then when people ignore the labels and get hurt, the manufacturer has to pay for him to be repaired. Genetic conditions that used to eliminate themselves from the gene pool are now patched over and passed on to the next generation.



I don't see this to be true at all (about the having more babies). I will agree that American liberals are not compeltely liberal... but the modern crop of conservatives don't really seem to be conservatives.

CanyonWind,

I have a LOT of permutations of possible things figured out, have watched WHO KNOWS how many movies, and have seen subtlties, etc... I can often call them up faster than a computer. That STILL doesn't seem to help whe push comes to shove. I'm at a loss. If I am lucky, I find out JUST when it is too late. I don't know how to repair any damage I have done, etc...

I guess it is possible to learn some of it but, like you said, it just might not ever help. As for body language, etc... 2-3 times I was with a group, and they told me someone was interested, but I never picked up on it. The same goes for people feeling insulted, etc... When I am the one that might be "transmitting" any bad ideas, I try to figure out how things can be taken. I have better luck with that.

Steve

Why are you so eager to label someone you dont even know?

If you knew me better you would know Im not simple enough to be described with such things. Im everything and nothing I take whatever position makes most sense for the situation even if Im agreeing with a group in once sentence and agreeing with their opposition in the next I owe no one my loyalties.

Besides recognizing the need for population control laws in this age in order to maintain society is no more totalitarian than recognizing the need for laws prohibiting murder.