Why both geniuses & retardates seem autistic

Post Reply New Topic

In an earlier thread, I proposed a theory that autism is simply too much consciousness. Allow me to elaborate: intelligence can be divided into main parts: conscious problem solving and subconscious problem solving. Subconscious problem solving evolved first, but in order to make the leap to fully human intelligence, we had to evolve consciousness.

The most intelligent people tend to be the most conscious, up to a point, and beyond this point, too much consciousness begins to impair intelligence, first by impairing the subconscious problem solving used in social interactions and physical coordination, and eventually if consciousness becomes too extreme, even higher level processes like language and even math become impaired.

So the optimum level of consciousness in my opinion, is above that of a neurotypical but below that of an aspergoid. That's why people who seem kind of nerdy and borderline aspergy (I.e. Bill gates) are the most intelligent. They have enough elevated consciousness to be good at computers, but not so much that their social skills and other talents are severely impaired.

However if 2 nerdy people mate, and the child inherits too many consciousness genes from both parents, they will surpass the optimum level of consciousness and actually have impaired intelligence. This explains the autism epidemic in silicon valley where brilliant parents routinely produce ret*d offspring, however these ret*d offspring often have large heads and savant talents, the last vestiges of their big brained high IQ parents.

LOL.

Seriously?

Ever tried applying Occam's Razor to your theory?

Why both geniuses & retardates seem autistic


Daniel Tammet summed it up this way: “The line between profound talent and profound disability is really a surprisingly thin one."



TheSunAlsoRises

I don't have any comments. I also don't care for the question.

'consciousness genes'?

I strongly feel the use of the "R" word here is unnecessary.

what would explain my situation?
My dad is dyslexic with good social skills.
His dad an entrepreneur with good social skills
His mom weird, unattached, no social skills and had OCD.

My mom is rigid, very intelligent, math genius, high sense of fashion and social conventions yet she has not had any friends in 40 years.
My parents have a 40 yr. marriage.
Her dad was a quiet weird artist. (white race)
Her mom a very warm, compassionate, and friendly woman (mulatto race)

Me:
Artist, introvert, high IQ, low social skills, sensory integration deficits and very attached to people I love.

If I compare myself to the way I understand most other people think within the confines of your paradigm I would have to say that my problem with the world is too much awareness of things and over processing of stuff that should be dealt with unconsciously.

It doesn't matter if it is the ability to deal with coming into contact with cotton wool or the ability to interpret non verbal signals from people, these things drive me into screaming apoplexia when they really, really shouldn't.

maybe

If two people with a lot of benign or even benevolent X marry and have a kid, then the kid gets a genetic double dose of X. That double dose then produces the bad thing- the disablity of autism.

There is nothing new about that equation.

Whats new is the value you are giving to X.

you're saying that it is something called "consciousness".

you're saying that what Einstein (or whatever your genius of choice is) had in common with a severely autistic child is "consciousness".

An extra supply of consciousness.

As most folks define "consciousness" the opposite is more likely.
Both savant type geniuses and autistics are inward turnng and are less "conscious" of the surrounding world- both the physical world- and certainly of the social world than are average neurotypical joes.

So giving X the value of "consciousness" does not make any sense.

Way back in the sixties when autism was first put on the map I remember hearing an early expert on the radio saying "ive noticed that the parents of autistics tend to live in their own heads-into thoughts. Perhaps thats influenced by genes and the child gets a gentic double dose of that and becomes autistic."

So the part of what you're saying that is plausible is not original. And the part of what you're saying that is original does not make any sense to me.

Boy, you guys use the R-word like, Bla........never mind. LoL.

TheSunAlsoRises