Is Asperger's Evolution in Process?

Post Reply New Topic

I have a theory. Asperger's is evolution in process. Human brains are changing and we are becoming smarter, so nature has to accommodate for our changing environment by preparing the human race, or catching us up rather, for the rapid change in technology, science, and communication styles. Think about it, we are relying more and more on computers and technology to communicate with less face to face interaction. So, it is not and illness or disorder in my humble opinion. It is nature's response to change. Humans are changing rapidly. I wonder if most of the population will behave like an Aspie in a few hundred years.

Food for thought.

You are not the first person to speculate about this. You seem to be attributing a goal-oriented personalized will to "Evolution" as if it were a sentient being with a plan.

The way evolution works is that random mutations happen, and they may or may not help the individual survive and reproduce to carry on the new mutation. The mutation responsible for autism may allow autistics to fill an ecological niche in a technological society, but so far it doesn't seem to make them any better able to reproduce. In fact, in makes them much less likely to find a mate, and makes those that do more likely to choose to be childfree.

Yeah typical, the thing about autism and aspergers is that it has been happening for a while now, so to say that nature is trying to catch us up or to advance evolution can be considered a little out there just for the sake; that we are the ones afflicted so we do have a bias to saying that, and that to say that nature is trying to get us ready for the electronic age is unrelated to the affliction. How ever due to the re-occurrence of autism and that of aspergers could have a nod that there might be something that is causing this in the enviromennt or nature itself, what it is I would love to know. For me I think there could be a chemical that permeates the mother during pregnancy and some how interacts with the developing brain of the fetus, though I can not say what it is how it works or even if it exists for that matter, all I can say is that it is happening and we might as well deal it.

FRINGE kinda predicted it.........
http://www.feveravenue.com/wp-content/u ... ervers.jpg

First of all, scientists have already speculated that we've reached our intelectual limit so there is little hope that we're getting smarter. Secondly, evolution focuses on reproduction over everything else and we autistics are, as you probably know, not that social. Although, evolution could be guiding us down a path toward specialization and we are only in the beginning stages. This is in accordance with intelligent design and I am a God fearing man so this works for me. Mankind has slowly been getting taller over the centuries and who knows what we may look like in a few thousand years. The book of Revelation implies that we may be here another thousand years and the world may not end, but simply be reformed into a wasteland with civilizations here and there.

I actually read a piece not too long ago (I don't remember what publication) that stated that some scientists have noticed that the "growing taller" evolutionary mutation has finally started to shut off. Some have also theorized that this mutation was kicked off by human beings needing to see over tall grasses -- either for hunting or safety.

It's an interesting thought anyways...

Beginning stages - I agree. Very beginning.

Is evolution random? Hmmm. I always thought we evolved as a result of our environment. We need to be able to solve problems to survive, so perhaps human problems are becoming more complex.
Cavemen didn't have to worry about pollution, traffic, etc. Know what I mean? Their brains were developed for their current environment.

Sack - yes, interesting that scientists are noticing a change so quickly, too. Changes are usually so subtle and take millions of years.

Well, if you believe in guided Evolution/Intelligent Design, then this is even more compatible with the idea of humans evolving to match their world in a way that isn't explained by random mutations or natural selection alone.

Personally, I subscribe to punctuated equilibrium. I have no idea if a god or gods played a part in this or not, but if so, it was probably more like pantheism than Genesis.

I'm open to the idea of Evolution occurring rapidly in a short period according to a specific apparent purpose not explainable solely by natural selection. That's what fits best with the fossil record anyway (long periods of stasis and rapid change), and that's how everything else in the universe appears to work (including me improving my autistic symptoms!). What caused it? Who knows?

I disagree.... several reasons.

1. Natural selection is not a goal-directed process. You can't personify it.

2. Autism reduces the reproduction rate; therefore a population of all autistic people would not be as adaptive as a population of all NTs.

3. Autism is already an evolutionary adaptation... not for the autistic individual, but for the community as a whole.

The genetics for autism are associated with disability, but also with innovation, creativity, and persistent research. That disability requires the presence of a cooperative society because the individual is unable to survive independently. However, those same genes have benefits--benefits which are more useful when their results are used by an entire community. Therefore, a community with a few very disabled autistic people, a few autistic people capable of making technological contributions, and a significant number of NT innovators with autistic genes helping them along, will have an advantage over a purely NT community that far outweighs the need to care for the more dependent members of that community.

Let me make it clear that this is not unique to autism. Rather, it is a function of diversity. When humans became social animals with big brains and symbolic communication capable of passing on information indefinitely, we changed the game where evolution is concerned. Now, instead of just passing on physical and mental traits, we pass on ideas too. That means that someone like an autistic or borderline-autistic person, who may reproduce less, will also pass on ideas that can benefit other individuals in his community. Since that community interbreeds, the same genes that made that autistic person will still be passed on by relatives, and the population of autistics and borderline-autistics is maintained. A human community can draw strength from many types of diversity. Autism is only one of them.

In other words: Autism is not the next step in evolution, because steps don't make sense. It is simply one of many traits that human communities can use within an interdependent society.

I think it's sad that people are moving away from face to face interaction, sure it sucks when people are judgemental jerks but face to face interaction with someone you connect with or a face to face conversation about something intresting in my opinion certainly beats talking to people over the internet or phone.

Relying too much on computers in technology could very well be the downfall of humans.

It's a genetic-disorder. Aspergers IS a handicap, it's hardly an evolutionary advantage.
Society with only aspies would not function very well, for obvious reasons.
The "more intelligent"-thing is a myth. We have many intellectual-impairments.
I'm sorry to rain on your parade.

Evolution is a lot slower than people think. In order to evolutionary change to occur quickly, you have to have a very large number of people fail to reproduce, and the genetic contribution to the trait has to be quite large. For example, if a disease wiped out half the population (or rendered them infertile - for evolutionary purposes, infertility has the same impact as death), and surviving versus dying was almost completely genetic, then you would find a very rapid change in the prevalence of that genetic trait.

For example, in the fox domestication study, only the tamest 10% were allowed to breed in each generation. In two to three generations (which in human terms would take about 60 to 100 years) the overtly aggressive response to humans had been eliminated from the population. By the fourth generation, they began to see a few engaging in doglike tail-wagging in response to humans. By six generations, the first foxes who whimpered, whined and licked humans appeared, and by the 30th generation this response was present in 49% of foxes. For humans, 30 generations would take about 900 years.

If AS, however, is selected for at all (or even not selected against as strongly as it used to), it'll be a very slight effect. Nowhere near the impact of only 10% of the population reproducing. Many NTs are having kids, as are many AS people.

That has nothing to do with genetics. It's caused by better nutrition.



There are two components to evolution - mutation and selection.

Mutation is entirely random. (Well, not exactly, but which kinds of mutations are most common has no relationship to their phenotypic impact, it's based on things like a tendency to lose telomeres and confuse similar sequences of base pairs.) Mutations are how new genes are introduced into a population - an error during the formation of gonadal cells results in a child having a genetic trait not present in either parent. For example, a child with achondroplasia (a dominant single-gene form of dwarfism) born to two normal-height parents.

Selection refers to the way in which certain genes impact your probability of producing surviving young. For example, if a certain gene causes death before reproductive age, or makes you infertile, or makes you less able to attract a mate, or makes your children more likely to die... all of those result in selection against that genetic trait. This is not random (though in very small populations, random events can have as big an impact as selection does).



Why not? Most of my problems come from living in a society designed by and for NTs. I think an AS-only society would do just fine.

Evolution doesnt work that way.
Or rather- yes the environment shapes us- by not THAT way.

The environment shapes us by killing you off before you can reproduce- and by allowing other to live long enough to reproduce.

If trait A allows you to reproduce- you pass it on to your progeny. If it continues to be adaptive it will allow to your children to reproduce. Thus trait A will become more and more common in the population. Finnally trait becomes the norm. And we would as a species will have evolved ot have trait A.

If trait B kills you off before you sire babies then trait B will not be passed on to the next generation.

So which kind of trait is autism?

Does autism aid and abette its sufferers to produce babies- and does it aid and abett getting those babies reared to adulthood to they to can reproduce?

The answers to those two questions are no, and no.

So obviously autism is a type b type trait. One that is more like to be weeded out than to become ever more prevalent. So it would not appear that autism is a positive trend in evolution.

Since people with Asperger's Syndrome seem to exhibit a lack of nonverbal communication skills, limited empathy with their peers, and physical clumsiness (all of which tend to put other people off), this seems a step backward in evolution.

Since lack of empathy, stimming, and obsessive-compulsive behavior have significantly adverse effects on an Aspie's prospects for "Dating & Mating", it would seem that even if AS were an evolutionary "next step", it would definitely not be an advantageous one, since having AS would severely reduce one's reproductive chances.

In my case, however, I was driven to succeed and overcome my social disadvantages even before I knew what AS was, so socializing after leaving my parents' home became progressively easier as time went on.

This thread again? The short answer is no. The long answer is asking yourself "does autism/AS assist in the propagation of the species?", in which case, still no.