91–100 of 134 posts
[flagged]
You lost respect for a person and their writing because they like their brain and how it works? How so? Why? What drove this comment? Zero karma account; did you create it just to shit on this person?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you looked into ADHD?
Thanks, I didn't really mean it was a negative, perhaps this is indicative of the problem - someone finds things odd, therefore here's a list of diagnoses. I should up my dosage of soma probably.
[flagged]
> Lost all respect instantly. Just imagine there’s a cult that tells everyone that you and people like you are a mistake that should have been killed or “fixed” in the womb. I maintain respect for the author, they have a good attitude in a grim reality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So if all the tribe goes to one water source because that's what they always do. And someone decides they want to try other water sources because they don't want to use the traditional source just because it's always been done that way. What happens when the traditional source gets contaminated? The outsider then has an advantage. Yes tribal dynamics require people to act like sheep, but that can lead to getting stuc…
Amazing strawman you built here. Very impressive. Now try to argue the actual point, maybe?
You are talking about putting all your eggs in the tribal cohesion basket.
That doesn't deal very well with black swan events. Not putting all your eggs in one basket maintains the ability of the tribe to "duplicate itself".
So given that I have provided an mechanism for improved survival of the group, that doesn't require the group to be completely homogeneous, please explain how I strawmanned your argument.
Or maybe point out what point you were trying to make, as it evidently isn't very clear
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks, I didn't really mean it was a negative, perhaps this is indicative of the problem - someone finds things odd, therefore here's a list of diagnoses. I should up my dosage of soma probably.
Ah apologies, didn't mean to pathologise you; for some, having a suitable label helps in understanding oneself and finding helpful accomodations.
"What if I'm the normal one and the rest of society is wrong" This kind of framing-inversion might work as a coping mechanism to get you through some dark times as a spergy adolescent. But eventually you have to reconcile yourself to the reality of autism: it really is a neuro-developmental disorder and you actually do have deficits in social understanding, which you might be able to improve with deliberate effort. Y…
You do realise Neurodivergent people have spent their life trying to make sense of the rest of the world in a way that NTs don't need to.
You call it "deficits in social understanding" I call it not understanding why people lie, and not mean what they say.
Do you term it "deficits in social understanding" when someone thinks it's wrong to murder people?
Do you term it "deficits in social understanding" when you don't understand a Neurodivergent person?
You're just equivocating statistical frequency with 'normal' and then with 'correct'.
The point of the article is to point out those flawed assumptions. Obviously your 'deficits in social understanding' prevented you from realising that.
.... Or is that a moral failing?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Lost all respect instantly. Just imagine there’s a cult that tells everyone that you and people like you are a mistake that should have been killed or “fixed” in the womb. I maintain respect for the author, they have a good attitude in a grim reality.
In my opinion, that’s just a victim mentality. There is a lot of suffering in this world. When you’re above average, like the author, you should be able to recognize that, put your own problems into perspective, and compare them to what’s happening around you. From there, the natural conclusion should be to stay quiet about it
what?? such an absolutely tone-deaf and privileged thing to say. just because there is suffering in the world means that the suffering that i and others experience isn't worth speaking out about? You do know that when people talk about their problems other people that have those same problems can relate to them, and it brings a sense of relief to both parties, right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amazing strawman you built here. Very impressive. Now try to argue the actual point, maybe?
" the goal is to keep the ability to duplicate itself" You are talking about putting all your eggs in the tribal cohesion basket. That doesn't deal very well with black swan events. Not putting all your eggs in one basket maintains the ability of the tribe to "duplicate itself". So given that I have provided an mechanism for improved survival of the group, that doesn't require the group to be completely homogeneous,…
Sorry, that's waaaay off the mark.
I am taking about OP's remark where he wants experts to not "talk about his brain (development) having a genetic mistake", and I am saying that any individual with a brain that has developed in a way that diverges from the norm (and consequently makes it more difficult to socialize, empathize and find a mate), then we can definitely say that this brain has a "genetic mistake".
Oh yes and probably the authors themselves have a related form on neuro-atypical-divergence know as neuro-tragically-compulsive-analisys disorder, related to a quite common social-accademic-pressure about being in control and classificate all things they do not have in control and that they do not clearly can relate with, causing a pathology, relatively benign, consisting in create pseudo-scientific-terms to apply to…
After reading this several times, I've tried to identify if your satire is trying to meet the author's satire somewhere over the Atlantic, or if it's aimed at some kind of self-reference or in-joke that I'm just not parsing. It demonstrates the author's point from back in the 1990s so well, but also makes its own biting social commentary on how often authoritative-sounding language gets weaponized by a majority to di…
I feel that in this kind of matter, demonstrations (an others things) are in the eye of beholder, and a language that has a specific weight much greater than what it seeks to represent, set afloat in the sea of life, runs the risk of capsizing and sinking (feel free to laugh here).
it's inevitable and i'm (partially) resigned to the implications it has on whole (modern) life, but anyone who wants to continue to pathologize vivisect and classify human experience is free to do so, but (for me) regarding life, true knowledge comes first over (presumed) academicism
Being somewhat odd is normal.