Evoplutionary Advantages and Disadvantages of Aspergers

Post Reply New Topic

Might there not be some evolutionary advantages for a certain percentage of a human popoulation to have aspergers.

Maybe Aspies make excellent Solo hunter gatherers in times of population bottlenecks, (great concentration skills, better pattern recognition, better intelligence, higher pain thresh hold).

Or maybe it was due to the neolithic transition and the spread of agriculture and language and industry that allowed induviduals with AS to be excellent Crafts men, philosiphers etc and thus be richer and less likely to die before marriage and be able to afford to have more children.

Maybe there were external factors preventing the percentage Aspies in a population from going above a certain percentage.

It would be interesting to see if there are different percentages of Aspies in different parts of the world, in relation to the recent historical li9festyles of those populations (hunter gatherer, bronze age, nomadic farmers etc).

In the information age, it is an evolutionary advantage to value analysis over human social interaction. It is an advantage to be able to hyperfocus on a computer for 8 hours a day. Now that dating and socialization are also more of an analytical activity (social networking and dating websites) geeks/aspies are now much more able to breed. In the media "geek chic" is popular and geeks are starting to be seen as desirable mates. I believe all of this contributes to the "autism explosion"... Dot Com nerds didn't just acquire money in the 1990s, we also acquired mates, and produced children... autistic children.

I am just saying that in the information age, analytics are more important than biceps, and by and large I believe the human genome is responding to that niche.

One of the biggest differences between humans and other animals is that our brains are so important that as infants we are basically a giant brain casing (head) connected to a useless body. Most other animals are significantly more self sufficient, much earlier. That is why we have very active parents, to help us to grow, develop, and become self sufficient slowly, so that we can continue to wield that massive brain. It is sometimes counter-intuative that humans can be viewed as the top of the evolutionary tree, even though there are animals that are much faster, stronger, and durable... and they are all of those things much earlier than humans are.

In fact if you looked objectivly at a human baby, you might assume that they were low on the evolutionary tree. Now look at an aspie child. They often need more care untill later in life. They are often less self sufficient at a comperable age to a normal human. So I submit that the counter-intuitive principle that forces us to look at human development as a group rather than as an individual would cause us to realize that developmental delays might actually be an evolution-positive trait, since it allows our brains to develop in a way that is sometimes more useful for the tasks that we need to do.

yeah good point about the 1980's and dotcom boom.

I read that Silicon Valley has the highest percentage of autistic children in the world, 4 times the national american average.

Evolutionary advantage ?
Well, the increasing use of the labels Aspergers and HFAS suggest that the social constructs "child" and "adult", an oppressive dichotomy causing massive psychological damage to thousands, may be close to explosion, which would be a good thing.

Sensitivity is not necessarily an advantage to members of a species.

I think there is no doubt that the tribe with a few aspies sprinkled in was at an evolutionary advantage over non-aspie tribe. I've always been able to change almost any system that I've been a part of. It's not that I'm particularly intelligent, it's that by never really embracing the group, it is easy to see weaknesses, and new ways of doing things.

Focussed skills.
Every aspie is a professor.
Put them all together and you get a professor in every area.

This isn't so much about aspies... but it's relevant to the topic.

My son may be add, or it may just be his aspieness... dunno.

A paediatrician was talking about ADD in evolution and he said that he was watching a wildlife show where the animals (antelopes or something) were eating grass and a lion was sneaking up on them. All of the animals were eating seriously except for one who just couldn't concentrate and kept looking up every few seconds.

He said... that one is the ADD antelope.

The ADD antelope was the first to detect the lion and warned the herd.

The doctor told us that it was then that he realized that ADD is part of nature - an evolutionary necessity. I'd say Asperger's very much the same.

You don't want a whole herd of aspies, but you definitely need a few.

I would say that AS is a result of human speciation, specifically the adaptation of humanity to the technological age (said adaptation probably started at some point during the renaissance or the industrial revolution)

As much as everyone wants to create a romantic picture of AS and it's place in human history the fact is that it is just a neurological disorder. A defect (from standard) of the human brain. Sure it gives rise to some great attributes and we all have to make the best of it, but there are a few downsides as well.

There are many cases (far outnumbering autistics) of NT's pursuing a goal with great dedication to achieve great success. There are also many NT's who are the leaders in their technological fields. Also with the social nous to get noticed and get their research published. There are also a myriad of examples in every field of every human endeavour of NT's excelling beyond ordinary ranges in the population. And it is also the case that not every AS is blessed with super high intelligence, or the ability to focus on a culturally useful task (i.e. get paid for it.) And more often than not they might be debilitated in their pursuit by sensory sensitivities that impede their ability to influence a culture, or their failure to interact with other humans so acute that they are unable to contribute in any significant meaningful way to influence a culture.

That is not to say anyone's life is meaningless. You can not measure a person's worth on the amount they contribute to society. But it does directly effect a particular groups ability to be considered a species defining characteristic.

IN summary, autism isn't an adaption, it's a mutation (if it's found to be genetic) that gives rise to a neurological disorder. It is not the great behind the scenes definer of the human species and their civlisation(s) to date.


EDIT: One further point. Human beings don't NEED to adapt to the technological age... we CREATED the technological age. A humans survival does not depend on adapting to the environment (any more), but on adapting the environment to itself. To quote: "Nature: To be commanded, must be obeyed." -Ayn Rand