This post by Eric Raymond should be interesting to LW :-) Extended quoting:
There’s a link between autism and genius says a popular-press summary of recent research. If you follow this sort of thing (and I do) most of what follows doesn’t come as much of a surprise. We get the usual thumbnail case studies about autistic savants. There’s an interesting thread about how child prodigies who are not autists rely on autism-like facilities for pattern recognition and hyperconcentration. There’s a sketch of research suggesting that non-autistic child-prodigies, like autists, tend to have exceptionally large working memories. Often, they have autistic relatives. Money quote: “Recent study led by a University of Edinburgh researcher found that in non-autistic adults, having more autism-linked genetic variants was associated with better cognitive function.”
But then I got to this: “In a way, this link to autism only deepens the prodigy mystery.” And my instant reaction was: “Mystery? There’s a mystery here? What?” Rereading, it seems that the authors (and other researchers) are mystified by the question of exactly how autism-like traits promote genius-level capabilities.
At which point I blinked and thought: “Eh? It’s right in front of you! How obvious does it have to get before you’ll see it?”
… Yes, there is an enabling superpower that autists have through damage and accident, but non-autists like me have to cultivate: not giving a shit about monkey social rituals.
Neurotypicals spend most of their cognitive bandwidth on mutual grooming and status-maintainance activity. They have great difficulty sustaining interest in anything that won’t yield a near-immediate social reward. By an autist’s standards (or mine) they’re almost always running in a hamster wheel as fast as they can, not getting anywhere.
The neurotypical human mind is designed to compete at this monkey status grind and has zero or only a vanishingly small amount of bandwidth to spare for anything else. Autists escape this trap by lacking the circuitry required to fully solve the other-minds problem; thus, even if their total processing capacity is average or subnormal, they have a lot more of it to spend on what neurotypicals interpret as weird savant talents.
Non-autists have it tougher. To do the genius thing, they have to be either so bright that they can do the monkey status grind with a tiny fraction of their cognitive capability, or train themselves into indifference so they basically don’t care if they lose the neurotypical social game.
Once you realize this it’s easy to understand why the incidence of socially-inept nerdiness doesn’t peak at the extreme high end of the IQ bell curve, but rather in the gifted-to-low-end-genius region closer to the median. I had my nose memorably rubbed in this one time when I was a guest speaker at the Institute for Advanced Study. Afternoon tea was not a nerdfest; it was a roomful of people who are good at the social game because they are good at just about anything they choose to pay attention to and the monkey status grind just isn’t very difficult. Not compared to, say, solving tensor equations.
… Yes, there is an enabling superpower that autists have through damage and accident, but non-autists like me have to cultivate: not giving a shit about monkey social rituals.
There is much more to autism than that. It’s just one thing that’s easy for neurotypicals to notice.
This idea of having more “bandwidth” is tempting, but not really scientifically supported as far as I can tell, unless he just means autists have more free time/energy than neurotypicals.
This might turn out to have socially damaging implications once we figure out how to do genetic engineering if parents select against their future children having “autistic” genes.
If genetic engineering of future-kids becomes widespread, I expect to see a significant lessening of diversity. Most everyone will be Brandy and Clint. On the other hand, weird people will become REALLY weird :-/
This post by Eric Raymond should be interesting to LW :-) Extended quoting:
There is much more to autism than that. It’s just one thing that’s easy for neurotypicals to notice.
Of course, but Eric Raymond is not giving a comprehensive overview of autism, he is just making a single point.
This idea of having more “bandwidth” is tempting, but not really scientifically supported as far as I can tell, unless he just means autists have more free time/energy than neurotypicals.
I think he means hyper-focus, basically.
This might turn out to have socially damaging implications once we figure out how to do genetic engineering if parents select against their future children having “autistic” genes.
What is “this”?
If genetic engineering of future-kids becomes widespread, I expect to see a significant lessening of diversity. Most everyone will be Brandy and Clint. On the other hand, weird people will become REALLY weird :-/