Evolution and stuff

Post Reply New Topic

I'm sure this topic has been covered a few hundred times already on here but I'm new to this so I'm going to have my fun anyway!

So neanderthals had their time and place in the evolutionary process and although there are still a few lurking in football stadiums and the like, we have moved on. But where is evolution taking human beings, if we (and the planet) are to survive? It goes without saying that if we continue as we are, we are going to destroy ourselves and our beautiful planet so surely the next step for our race is something along the lines of Asperger's/autism? I mean, we would still survive. The world would be less crowded (obvoiusly we would still procreate but to a lesser degree, perhaps?), there would be no violence, no wars, no cruelty and a very well looked after (and probably pretty organised) planet. Am I being arrogant in thinking this? I don't mean to be, it just makes sense in my funny old head.

Is it a strong gene, the AS/ASD one? For example, I have AS, my husband is a NT (a 'neurotypical', just to clarify, but he does have his neanderthal moments) and we have two kids. Well, one but one on the way. So what is the likelihood of our two kids having an ASD? Does anyone know the statistics? I would be so interested to know. I believe Simon Baron-Cohen has studied this, I just haven't had a chance to read up on it.

Thanks for reading!

It makes for a cute novel.. you know, post-apocalyptic, dystopian, or something along those lines, but I don't think it's realistic. It also implies that we're inherently better than those without autism, or that we are not capable of evil, and both aren't true in the real world.

I think that the world of the future will require a range of different minds and personality types in order to function.

But surely a world populated with only autistic people would be full of people with different minds and personalities?

I agree that we autistics are not all the same, but the anatomy of our brains gives us strengths and weaknesses that we share with each other - but not with the rest of humanity. There are some roles in society that we perform well in, while others might not be as great of a fit. That's why I think that society benefits from there being a range of personality types and minds (not just Autistic ones). I'm still a proud member of the tribe, though

Totally agree. I'm just allowing myself to fantasise, really! I do spend an awful lot of time dwelling on the state of the planet and why human beings seem so intent on destroying it (a 'special interest', I suppose!). I just wonder where the evolutionary process is going to take human beings, if Mother nature doesn't put her foot down and wipe us out.

In simplest terms, NTs need autistic people, and vice versa.

We need social abilities. We need alternative perspectives.

If one wants to be a leader, one has to be full-time one. One cannot just withdraw because of sensory overload or whatever.

By the same token, one must have the capacity to think through many aspects of a question...which autistic people have a decent capacity for, once they are inspired.

Both are needed.

We need charismatic, 24/7 leaders, but they need advisors that keep a level and logical mind trough crises, without being emotionally affected.

We need people who can focus their mind on a singular (research) topic for weeks on end, but also those who will step away and determine if this topic is a useful one.


as crafty stated: NTs and ASDs need each other to thrive, although the (ideal) balance is open to discussion

Firsty, this view of evolution makes no sense. Evolution has no end goal where it is "taking us", it can only really be discussed in relation to the surrounding environment of a given organism. Also, ASD is related to hundreds of genes that, either alone or in concert, manifests as various degrees of autism. And evolution does not work in distinct "steps". X-men is not a biology lesson.

As for killing the planet: while our nuclear stockpiles and capacity for polution and global warming and all that is surely devestatingly damaging, we are going to wipe oursleves of the face of the planet long before we destroy the planet itself and the rest of the life living on it.

Also, suggesting that society would be so much better if eveyone was autistic makes no sense; human success is built on intelligence and cooperation. Imagine a group of 50 stone age humans, where one of them is autistic. The 49 that aren't can work well together and bring home food, build homes and protect the group, whilst the one that works best alone might be a shaman who makes cave paintings, or a flint-knapper who makes better spears for the hunters and tools for the builders. Specialist tasks. Now imagine the same group, but the prevalence of autism is higher; you have 20 people who work best on their own, and 30 who have to cooperate to provide the food and shelter for both themselves and their "specialists". The latter group is likely to struggle to survive.

Now, with modern society as the framework, it's entirely possible that autistic traits are seen as more valuable today than they were in previous eras. The "Digital Age" and all that. Maybe even to the extent that people to whom such a mindset does not come naturally actively work to cultivate it in themselves so as to be better at their job. It is also possible that eccentric personality traits are more easily overlooked and accepted today because the person exhibiting them is an asset in other regards. But a society where more people than not were staunch individualists who work better on their own would likely soon start coming apart at the seams.

Yep...well stated. A group needs mutual cooperation to survive.

There is room for individualism--but when the chips are down, people must cooperate with each other.

Autistic people definitely have a role in any greater group/society--they should use their special abilities for the greater good, rather than refusing to cooperate because of the notion of a "hive-mind mentality." Sometimes, they have to complement the "hive," if you will.

In the future that I see, there won't be any Aspies due to eugenics. There will be little variation in the human race because any 'undesirable' traits will be eliminated in the womb or by simply forbidding people with these traits to breed by government decree.

I think the opposite will happen.

A new AIDS type disease will sweep the World, and it will wipe out all of the sexually active folks on the planet, and leave only the socially inept 40 year old virgin dork types to survive. The later type have few offspring. But a few is better than none at all- which is what everyone else will have- because they will all die young.

And because of this future genetic bottleneck aspies will become the majority, and the norm of the human species!

All supremacist views have ever done is cause, conflict, misery, injury and death. NT supremacism has caused huge harm for us. Autism supremacy as a reaction to NT supremicism feels good but will in the same bad result.

That's interesting. So when are you planning this move to North Korea that you see in your future? Because the west, at least, has this thing called basic human rights, one of which is "right to reproduce". Eugenics is a pseudoscientific fad (albeit based in sound theory) that has never been practically applied with any scientific rigor, but has always devolved into bigotry and "racial hygiene" informed by the opinion of whoever was in charge at the time. You can breed cows to produce more milk with measurable results. You could probably, in theory, breed humans that are stronger or faster on average. You can't breed your way out of something as broad and vaguely defined as the autism spectrum, and any sincere attempt at such will cast a net so wide that putting it into practice would yield a net loss of genetic diversity tantamount to specieal suicide.




...and then we will learn to reproduce via mitosis.

We must never preclude the possibility of the "natural way" to make babies....Never!

We would never survive if we only reproduced asexually.

You can't "hire" people to be parents to kids.

No. it would only mean humans would be like gibbons, and be monogomous. Or actually celibate, or monogamous. All of the outgoing folks who have premarital sex with be culled out. And then with instinctive monogamy the disease will stop spreading.

I don't think that Glebel was advocating what he was talking about. Lol! Its what he "saw", not necessarily what he wanted. In fact I think he was being dystopian. Kinda like I was.