Kind of, but not really. You're giving us too much credit. There's a theory that neanderthal discovered fire, but sapiens adopted it and thus thrived and interbred neanderthal into extinction. So in a way, they both gave rise to civilization. The creativity of the neanderthals, more specifically their technological discoveries, were a catalyst that empowered sapiens to reach the population levels necessary for civilization. We know that in all but native Africans there is around a 4% genetic neanderthal heritage. It's suggested there may be a link between neanderthal genes and autism. We can agree it doesn't seem to be breeding out. I can testify personally that my son has it so I'm pretty convinced it's genetic. There's no doubt he'll be better adapted and balanced because of my knowledge.
It's not hard to argue that technology is bringing relevance to our traits. My question is this. Will a technology dominated society, something on an order of magnitude we haven't seen yet, think 100-1000 years from now and beyond, favor aspie traits over that of NT? NT's love to celebrate their physical prowess, but let's be honest, we don't need the NFL to have a rewarding civilization. Studies show that testosterone has a greater negative effect than drinking when it comes to behavior. Same goes for hyper idealized societal standards. They say we're abnormal, but that's not according to some universal law. It's by their own self-favoring standards. If we don't become extinct, a hyper-technological world might give rise to a social hierarchy that favors aspie traits and then NT's would be the one's getting diagnoses. I'm bias of course, but aren't we all?
I've been refining my theory on where we fit in to the evolutionary process. I used to have an us vs. them thing going on, but I came to realize that it didn't really mesh well with my overall philosophy and that I also have a chip on my shoulder that I'll always have to be mindful of.
Anyway here it goes. Evolutionary success of a superorganism depends on the proliferation of the species. Given that we live on a very disaster prone planet it helps that when a catastrophic event happens there are enough left over to carry on. The methods we have adapted to survive are very profound, but as we see there is a price for being sentient, abstract though can lead to false beliefs. It's a double edged sword when you can believe in the yet undiscovered truth, but you are just as susceptible to believing in lies and even more susceptible to being deceived when you conform to the social hierarchy and aspire to social success above all. Now that's not necessarily a bad thing except we like to take for granted that the current model of society is artificial. Civilization is an artificial creation of man and we take it for granted everyday that it can be undone with our complacency alone. We would certainly be able to continue on without it, but it's a far more beneficial way of life for the species as a whole even if it does have its drawbacks. However, we seem to be pushing ourselves to the worst drawback of all, collapse of civilization as a result not of our inability to adapt, but our unwillingness.
That's where we come in. It's hardwired into our genes that 1% of humanity is going to be autistic as a fail safe against complete subservience to an artificial hierarchy that could result in extinction if people were as accepting of authority as many modern institutions promote. If we never questioned the governments, the churches, the merchants then we would go extinct following their artificial models of the "ideal human". We follow them because they provide a net benefit, but when the dynamic changes, when their model becomes a net negative, that's when interesting things happen like revolts and such. That's fine and all, but how long must we repeat the same mistakes? The caretakers of modern social institutions have no problem repeating the past as they only continue to benefit more and more. They say the internet was made by autistics, it's not hard to argue how it has brought people closer together in plenty of negative, but overwhelmingly positive ways. Wal-Mart just had it's first strike in 5 decades of operation last week because people were able to organize on the internet. The reason why the internet was crucial in achieving that goal is that there is an anti-union culture in Wal-Mart and people are trained to expose union activities to management. Wal-Mart is notorious for paying bottom dollar and manipulating hours of their employees. Corporations and governments are being exposed for what they really are. We're slowly waking up.
Of course now that we are aware of the evolutionary imperative that we must survive by our own means and no "god" will save us from ourselves it changes things albeit in a manner in which goes mostly unnoticed. We are collectively aware of this truth even if individually our beliefs allow us to deny it. The proof is all around us today that we don't suffer because of some mystical force called "evil", we suffer because humans plot against each other to prove their own beliefs are superior, and while this mentality has brought us to this glorious stage of civilization we are becoming increasingly more aware of our commonality and the manipulations of the institutions of civilization whose greed and lust for power is the source of our economic misery.
The adversity we face is a necessity to overcoming our situation. I believe that in unity we will find our past accomplishments paling in comparison. That overcoming our own self-destructive ways as a species are intrinsic to evolution. That adversity is an antagonist of change as the struggles we endure shape who are, and who we dream to become.
Of course this is all based on the theory that humanity is actually a superorganism much like an ant colony, we just like to believe we're something more.
07 Oct 2012, 1:37 am
so I wouldn't want to babble on
