Neurodiversity is not a 'nice word for autism supremacy'!

Post Reply New Topic

In that argument we are giving ourselves power over genetic variations in a different way, one that allows us to delete genes for traits we don't like and allow popular politics to perform genetics based on genetics that don't fit the governing authority opinion on one Tuesday night. The save genes that make an LFA and LFA today, could make an LFA even smarter than us tomorrow if we apply a visionary understanding of genetics and add genes that create greater intelligence and additional neurodiversity.Haphazardly deleting genes for the sake of removing traits is probably a bad idea. What we have to determine is why selection preserved those genes in the first place and how that is preferential in certain circumstances, past or future. We are apparently Neanderthal in origin from things I've read (I'm not sure if that's still a topic of debate or not) so at some point those genes and perhaps a deficit of other genes allowed LFA genes to survive in some way. Though perhaps we are actually on the same page and just filling each other's ideas. LFAs to my knowledge only occur in LFA families where as families with Aspergers only get Aspergers, perhaps this is the result of epigenetic or unknown factors, but somehow it appears that it is possible for us to already be two variations of the Neanderthal genome. What I suggest is determining alternative vectors of intelligence for any given phenotype and building DNA for them that endows them with a new and useful genius. Of course this seems to be a plausible conclusion for your feelings on the matter as well, tho certainly not the only.

My major concern is simply that some human phenotypes/genotypes will disappear because some doctor or politician thinks badly of them or a social structure or law that exists in society that makes it difficult for a type to fit into that society. Governments always think they are the best and their laws absolute. The next major step in genocide could be the result of genetic advancements that ignore social differences or the fact that some social effect makes a genetic trait appear to be negative selection when the real solution is to improve society rather than destroy or alter a human being to the point where they become a minority and can no longer fight for themselves and simply go extinct. I think I need a mantra for this... anyone heard one? It sounds a little complex...

Anyways, what are your thoughts?

I was sort of being sarcastic. I don't want him to get his way. But he was being sarcastic first, as he was being disrespectful and dismissive of what I was saying. He doesn't want to share anything.

They wouldn't be arbitrary decisions. Anyone basically knows what hurts or helps. The choice wouldn't come down from just any government. The government has to first be willing to make the benefits of the technology available universally. They would have to support implementation of genetic based therapies designed by sound and uncorrupted scientists.


But obviously, whichever combination of gene variants LFAs have, with interaction with their environment, isn't beneficial. Even if one of their gene variants is useful, nobody would need them to keep the variants of the other genes that are depriving them of ability. The understanding of genetics that you mentioned could salvage such positive gene variants when it becomes possible. It's not hard to realize why genetic variants for various aptitudes were selected for. A lot is known already.


That seems to have a lot of opportunity.


Things are awful enough in society anyway. There's no reason to resist change and transformation. It's not really possible to thrive or live comfortably while depending on others and lacking the resources to get ahead. I'm only thinking of traits of ability, so there wouldn't be any questioning of whether they're positive or negative. The ideal should be for any government or authority to be compelled to guarantee basic abilities to everyone as a right, through necessary technologies.

Yawn. While sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, wit is the highest form of humour. One suspects that you lack it. Here, have a cure for your disorder.

Oh, you said this...

I think you ought to accept that you do not know whether I want to share anything or not, rather than trying to make an ass out of you and me. I do want to share, actually; it's you who doesn't. See, I can claim what you want, and it's true, regardless of whether you want it or not, because I claim it is. Got it?


Not true. Without meaning to be rude, I suggest you educate yourself on genetics and inheritance.

Hmmm I think that still kinda scares me. Ability based protection alone isn't enough. Our culture as it will form when we come together will be largely driven by genetics. There needs to be protection of culture related traits and personality, quirks and differences. IMO, if it doesn't interfere with the person's survival or is only compromised by social systems it must remain. We must always remember our natural roots.

You're so prideful of your own wit, that you can't realize the suffering of so many others out there who don't have your wit. You won't address the real things I said.


I think I know that you're insensitive and selfish.

It doesn't matter if it scares you. Too much is at stake. I honestly don't care for the concerns of the ones out there who are not experiencing pain, who obsess over "culture", even while the culture now is degenerate already. They won't stop talking of "quirks" while they are inconsiderate in their extreme individualism. They talk of this to distract others from the real issues of ability, where the real problem lies.

And what was that calling Magento insensitive and selfish? Pot meet kettle.

I think you get your rocks off acting like a snide jerk.

Acting? I am a snide jerk. I'm sure the WP moderators both former and current will agree with me on that.

As annoying as you can be, you can't be even a small fraction of a nuisance compared to the ordeals I and others have to deal with on a daily basis.

LOOK GUYS.we can take a chill pill on this thread or i can go get a moderator to lock it.take your pick.this comment is directed at everyone

What's wrong with being a snide jerk? Though I prfer to play Devils Advocate, though - trolling with a purpose, not that I'm doing what I suspect dalurker is doing, mind...

ha ha good one

ECT is actually still used, not typically for autism but more for depression.......I certainly don't want ECT for my depression though, I think I'll avoid the feeling like there's a black hole where my memories should be which is what the after effects are described as. I personally cannot speak for the OP or anyone else other than myself but I certainly don't think I am better then anyone because of having autism, that's stupid to me I mean even if it could be proven as true I just don't see much reason to focus on 'oh im so superior.' but that's just me.

Also I don't think there will be a cure so I don't think much about it, but I can understand the attitude of not liking the idea of one.....considering autism is not the same as some illness you develop or some disease you get, its basically a different brain wiring and messing too much with that could actually do more harm than good. I mean some of the external therapies using the punishment/reward model can even cause problems I mean trying to train someone who does not function neurotypically by punishing any of their 'autistic' behavior and rewarding any so called neurotically behavior is just sadistic and gives off the wrong message. So no I do not think people should be barred from therapy, or cures they want but it should not be pushed on anyone. Another thing is if a cure or therapy is used for any reason other than it being in the best interest of the individual being given the cure or therapy I definitely disagree with it.

But the technologies are getting so robust and are becoming capable of understanding the many aspects of the neurology involved. But many aspects of brain functioning vary among those who are autistic, which contributes to the wide disparities in functioning/aptitude and therefore success, among individuals with autism. Whatever differences in the brain that are causing some autistics to be relatively impaired and others to be relatively skilled/abled, need to be changed. So even if there's a particular brain wiring that is similar for all with autism, that may not be what really has to be changed.


It's not going to be pushed on anyone. It can't really be done for reasons other than the bringing of opportunities. It's not going to be done in order to control others.