Asperger's and the Uncanny Valley

Post Reply New Topic

Yeah i think "uncanny valley" is more than likely the reason. It probably explains the triggering for a lot of bullying in general in fact.

Speech style is very similar to many Aspies when we are not acting. If I did not know it was a robot I would think of it as a potential friend.

Last edited by ASPartOfMe on 26 Oct 2013, 11:54 am, edited 1 time in total.

I can understand why other people would place many of us with HFA in the uncanny valley, though. Every day when I'm shaving, I look in the mirror, and one day I was paying extra attention, and I thought to myself: "Yeeaahhh... you're a handsome fellow, but that gazing stare of yours is not doing you any favours." I can understand how that would weird people out at times. Add to that my unusual body language, stance, voice, and speech pattern, and you got yourself an Uncanny Valley Dweller. Looks like a human, but the walk and talk are just a tad 'off'.

I suspect that the UV accounts for a lot of the lonliness of people with Aspergers. I have actually developed a method for addressing that, ie a way for people in the UV to find others who do not mind it. Unfortunately Alex has no interest in promoting it. I do not expect this post to be up long Who know, it might even get me banned.

I suspect that the UV accounts for a lot of the lonliness of people with Aspergers. I have actually developed a method for addressing that, ie a way for people in the UV to find others who do not mind it. Unfortunately Alex has no interest in promoting it. I do not expect this post to be up long Who know, it might even get me banned.

I actually think that I am done with theories that naturalize human hatred as simply the way people are. That's a great way to let people off the hook for being abusive bullies or just plain jerks.

I mean, I understand the impulse to find an explanation as to why other people have treated so many of us so badly, I really do, but I don't think there's any kind of inherent instinct or impulse within humans that drives this reaction.

Someone earlier in the thread pointed to an experiment in which one monkey was painted purple (the usual story is pink, though) and the other monkeys despite knowing that monkey before the painting, tore him to pieces. The thing is you can find a lot of apocryphal statements about this supposed experiment, but finding actual descriptions of an actual experiment seems much more difficult. However, I did find this other bit of information interesting

The Baboon Troop That Mellowed Out After the Alpha Males Died (link).

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Q-bB-qywJ0[/youtube]

I think that the notion, the understanding, the belief that humans are naturally predisposed to xenophobia is deeply questionable. Given that such attitudes can be shown to be entrenched socially, that it may simply be that this happens because society was constructed this way, whether deliberately or accidentally.

Given that it's questionable whether the uncanny valley even exists, I don't see the point of using it to hand NTs an excuse for their mistreatment of neuroatypical/neurodivergent people. I mean they'll happily use it, but I'm pretty sure it's not the answer.

The video is interesting but I do not think that it is very relevant. Do a search on the two words orwells boot and the first item back after paid links, and usually under the name factotum666 is a 6500 word article that I wrote which I believe offers an abundance of evidence to indicate that nature makes us authoritarian and stupid.

In the case of the Keekorok troop they are living in an unnatural situation, to wit: an over abudnance of food. Stress the tribe by making food scarce and within a couple of generations the psychopaths (see "the wisdom of psychopaths") will again return and be the leaders. Also this example has nothing to do with xenophobia, or, more importantly, disgust. People in the UV are not repulsive bacause they are different, but because they appear "diseased". The best way to stay healthy is to avoid a diseased person. That is definitely genetically hard wired into us. Clearly, people who avoid other diseased people will have a distinct survival advantage. (There is a tradeoff depending on kinship --- often it is better to care for diseased kin. Caring for diseased strangers offers no genetic benefits) Bullying and killing is a sort of secondary, and more permanent way of dealing with a diseased person. If they are dead and gone then you can stop avoiding them. That is more efficient. Sorry, but that is just how nature is. After reading my orwells boot article feel free to point out where my logic or information / evidence is in error.

One thing I liked about this. Can we figure out how to kill the 1%? Maybe some brilliant technaspergers type will figure a way to genetically modify an STD to target the 1%, or even better, the Psychopaths among us. Yea, we would loose Jobs, but also Gates, and James Dimon and Bernie Madoff. It is a trade that I would make

On what grounds do you say this? Given the number of studies that indicate its presence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley, what evidence do you have that these studies are all flawed? Yes, we have not nailed it down exactly, but on the other hand we have not nailed down ASD either. That does not mean that we do not exist does it? Mostly people are afraid of the unknown. I have found that when I tell people that I have aspergers, and resided in the UV, they are less uncomfortable around me. Some are downright comfortable. On the other hand, if I wish to discombobulate someone I can tell them that the Sandy Hook shooter also had Aspergers. The mere fact of your not liking something does not mean it does not exist. And to paraphrase Sun Tzu from his Art of War, if you are going to successfully deal with a "situation" you better understand what the situation is. Pretending that it does not exist is not usually the best way to do this.

I'd have to agree...I think its more an attitude that society has constructed that causes this hatred/mistreatment of people who have conditions like autism or other conditions who make them behave a bit 'off'. I disagree with the notion one should just accept this as the way of things and go on about their business....I think society needs to do a better job of adressing this issue and attitudes should change. Its not like there is something in our DNA that says 'you must ostracize and harrass people who come off as a bit strange' I think its more to do with the way society has been constructed.

I do not think excusing cruel behavior as 'just the way people are' is a good thing either.

That would make more sense if mental conditions like autism were contagious diseases...also in order to bully or kill someone you have to usually have some kind of contact with them...if you are avoiding someone how are you going to bully or kill them? Meh I will have to remain skeptical about that.

And our primitive brain knows that something is NOT contagious how exactly??? You are confusing how our evolutionary and very primitive brain functions from how our logical very recent brain works. And do not fool yourself, almost all decisions involving survival in any way are made way before our logic circuits kick in. If you do not believe that, then feel free to do research on the subject. As to bully or kill. Well, no close, and certainly no long term contact is required. You will have a lot more understanding --- and therefor exceptance --- of human behavior if you look what evolutionary / survival drives are likely to be driving that behavior. Yea, sometimes something 'breaks' and an individual does unusual things. But how can a behavior be widespread among almost all peoples if it does not confer some sort of survival advantage upon those who practice it? Nature / evolution is ALWAYS right

I am not going to ever feel that bullying or even killing people for having a neurological difference is justified. Also survival can also happen in a community that looks out for its members and doesn't ostracize or bully those who have difficulties or differences. There is pleanty of evidence to suggest its not necessarily a survival advantage to destroy peoples lives, especially since when an individual gets pushed to their breaking point they can become dangerous. But yes if its true that humans are designed to destroy whats different from the 'norm' then would there be any reason not kill most of them?

Also bullying and ostracizing the mentally ill or those with a mental condition is not nature/evolution per say...its not as though society doesn't condition people at all....Also wouldn't it make more sense to use logic we have evolved instead of sticking to primitive 'survival of the fittest' behavior. Its that very behavior in society that will destroy society.

So ... You seriously think that nature gives a S*** about what you think????

Yep. And your point is??? You can also have cultures that have little or no religions as we know them. You can have matriarchies. You can have lots of things, many of them are things that I prefer. But if you do not understand how nature works and why, then you have the same hope of changing society to be the way that you like as the catholics had when they thought that killing cats would be a good way to stop the plague.

Did I ever say anything was necessary? This is a red herring desperate attempt to not learn. HUH???


LET ME USE CAPITAL LETTERS. THE PRIMITIVE BRAIN DOES NOT SEE MENTAL CONDITIONS, IT SEES DISEASE AND CONTAGION!! ! Yea. We are no longer in that environment. Unfortunately for us, our brains have not changed as fast as our envrioinment has and they still operate at a much more primitive level. Doing what makes sense to out intellect is contrary to evolution / nature.

And your point is??? Did I ever make the claim that we should function at the level of our reptilian brain? No I DID NOT!! ! I said that we need to understand how the brain works, and how most societies work and why. Only by understanding the situation can we hope to make appropriate fixes. You did not bother to read my orwells boot article did you? I told you that my 6500 word article shows evidence and logic that evolution made us stupid and authoritarian. But NO. You did not. Because like most people you suffer from Dunning Kruger syndrome. Look it up

With all due respect your opinion is no more valid than mine. I said regardless of how nature works that does not justify bullying and ostracizing those who are neurologically different in society. I know how nature works, still don't see how it justifies cruel behavior in society is all.

And I did plan on reading the article, just wasn't in the mood to read something that from your description sounds like it would be aimed at justifying cruelty I can only handle so much of that kind of talk in one sitting. As for changing society...I feel its healthy and normal to want to improve it...Nature is cruel(though not always) so society has to be? I don't get it.

Also perhaps you suffer from that syndrome...as you are the one assuming I have no understanding of how nature works, and trying to act like your the expert. I usually underestimate myself.

I don't see how expressing an opinion is over-estimating ones self so go ahead and explain your diagnoses doctor.

And finally nessisarily in the context of 'its not nessisarily a survival advantage to destroy peoples lives' does not mean I was saying you said anything was nessisary. It means I am of the opinion a society can survive a lot better if it takes care of its members rather then ostracizing and bullying the ones who don't fit in...or have off putting differences or whatever.

Necessarily and nessisary aren't the same word.

I am not acting like I am the expert. I am assuming that my article is #1 on all search engines for a reason --- that is that I written something of value. In the past three years no one has faulted my information or logic. Perhaps you will be able to do that. Words like necessary, good, better. Those are human inventions by human standards. And you know what? they are not universal. All those words really mean when used by someone like you is some variation of "what I like" Nature does not care what you like. That fanatic Christian or Muslim does not care what you like. They only care what they like. Appeals to logic and mercy. BS. If you do not understand nature ... and your verbiage indicates that you do not, means that you will not be able to influence how nature works, and she will bite you in the ass. As a matter of fact, my guess is that she has been doing that on a regular basis.

You are unhappy because people do not act like you want them to. Tough S***t. Until you understand why they act that way, you will have no influence on how they act. I suggest that you reat the art of war, and the wisdom of psychopaths. And many other books that I reference.

As to expressing an opinion,. Again, nature and evolution do not care about your opinions. I do not state opinions. I state my observations, I check them. I draw logical conclusions. I do not think that you can point to a single opinion of mine.

I didn't use the word nessisary...also when I say good or better in the context of society, what I have in mind is something that everyone would benefit from of course I would like it but my motivation is more what could people as a whole benefit from. Not sure where you got the idea I only care about what I like, thats pretty far off from the truth there....and not sure how you get that out of the fact I don't think there is a justification for cruelty directed at those with neurological/psychological conditions...doesn't that more indicate I care about the wellbeing of my fellow humans? Also what is wrong with appealing to logic? logic is a good thing or so I thought. Also when did I say anything about influencing how nature works? I've been talking about 'society'.....society and nature are two different things people can change societies...but not so much nature.

Also I am not unhappy because people don't act they way I want them to, I am unhappy because society allows for and even encourages cruel behavior towards certain people and its bad for society as a whole. Yes it bothers me people are cruel to each other....I should be hung or burnt at the stake for that. Aside from that though I really don't care how people act.

Also when did I say nature and evolution care about my opinions? Also logical conclusions based upon things you read are opinions. Also explain to me how I 'don't understand' nature? Nature can be a cruel beast....I've always known that I only spent all of my childhood reading about animals and nature as well as watching documentaries on it so yeah I know how it works. I don't see how wanting a better society that encourages people to treat others with kindness and have a sense of community indicates that I don't understand nature.

Your article seems to lack academic credibility as well...it looks as though you are theorizing based on information you have read. Nothing wrong with that of course except you are trying to pass it off as absolute fact....when its a non-peer reviewed article you wrote yourself.

Riiiiiiiight. Because you are now god and you just KNOW what everyone would benefit from. Have you read any history? Do you have any idea how many atrocities have been set in motion by ideas from which "everyone would benefit"? How about communism? Want somethimg closer to home? Prohibition? Let me say this again. Nature does not recognize good or bad or any of those synonyms. Those words are used by people who simply do not want to take responsibility for their own likes and dislikes so instead of using phrases like "i like it", they emply god speak and PRONOUNCE "THIS IS GOOD!! !" or "THAT IS BAD!! !" Look up the concept E-prime. I suggest that you start using it instead of claiming the power of god to tell us mere mortals what is good and what is bad.
Yes. And drug warriors care about the well being of their fellow humans. Just ask them. One of the things that I write about in xfoolnature.org is the danger of st00pid people. That is those with Mensa level IQ's who are unwilling or unable to learn. You definitely show that you fit with that statement that nature and society are different. Especially since you lead this discuss with an example of the nature of society in a troop of primates. I bet you are now going to claim that primates are not natural, or go through some other humpty dumpty speak to justify your idea that society is unnatural. Cruel. Another nature of godspeak. Nature does not do cruel. Nature just is. straw man agrument.No. logical conclusions are logical conclusions. That is like saying that the entire structure of science is just an opinion, or that the theory of evolution is an opinion. If you understood nature you would realize that nature may act in ways that you do not like, (hence the word cruel), but that while people can be cruel, nature can only be natural.
Nothing wrong with that. But as Sun tzu said, if you do not understant the problem which is why people act the way they do, you are not going to fix it. And you need to understand that some things that we want are contrary to the way in which nature designed us. In part that is because, strangely enough, evolution can be thought of as unnatural. The b***h is always creating new things that did not exist in nature before and thesting them out. Our brains are one such construct. A new thing that no longer fits all that well in the new world that it itself has made. If you were familiar with the writings of Hawking and Popper you would that science does not deal in facts or truth. It deals in information, observations, predictions usefulness etc. You might want to read about Marjorie Prophet. She was a waitress when she got a McArthur award for her work on allergies by --- horror of horrors, publishing interpretations of work that others had done. [b]