[ExI] are we not just one race, the human race?

Sat Mar 22 10:11:29 UTC 2008

Autism is an inbreeding related disorder...

Don't shag your fifth cousin, that's what I say! :0)

Jeremy "Unpooftah" Webb - Heathen Oath Vitki> Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 03:55:07 -0400> From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca> To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> Subject: Re: [ExI] are we not just one race, the human race?> > Anne, I remember commenting a while back about how> autistics have a different perspective but that does> not mean that it is the right perspective. If you> want to limit yourself by using autistic as an excuse,> go ahead. Everybody has flaws. I choose not to name> my own. The more you determine yourself based on your> flaws is the reason you will choose not to be> open-minded. One perspective within a small group> does not compare to a large range of overall> behaviour. I've read a lot that you have posted and> find your postings highly educational although I> respect that you have a need to help others in your> particular state, it is not the majority. Sometimes> going outside the norm with an open mind can lead you> to bigger and better perspectives.> > Just an opinion> Anna> > > > Anna> > --- Anne Corwin <sparkle_robot at yahoo.com> wrote:> > > > > Stathis Papaioannou <stathisp at gmail.com> wrote:> > > I think Anne is talking about society's attitude> > towards people with> > > autism. For example, see this article:> > > > >> >> http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/magazine/16-03/ff_autism> > > > Bingo. > > > > And also, if anyone does read that article and the> > comments attached to it, you should also read the> > following (from Amanda's blog):> > > > http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?page_id=258> > http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?page_id=294> > http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?page_id=462> > http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?p=50> > http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?p=293> > http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/?p=90> > > > I'm not up for a big mailing list debate right now> > about anything and I'm actually sort of sorry I> > posted the comment I did last night, seeing as if I> > write something like that, people have every right> > and reason to ask for specific examples. > > > > But for starters: I can at least point to the> > principle identified in common parlance as> > "procreative beneficence". This is a view shared by> > Peter Singer and several others, and it suggests> > that parents have an obligation to bring into being> > the child capable of leading the "best possible> > life". However, ideas of what configurations allow> > this "best possible life" are often unthinkingly> > shaped by social norms that in actuality may have> > little to do with a person's intrinsic capacity for> > leading a good and reasonable life.> > > > I sometimes feel like I can't so much as defend the> > right of a deaf person to refuse a cochlear implant> > (or to not select *against* a deaf embryo) without> > being told that I'm advocating letting people run> > around injecting themselves full of arsenic> > (something which I would guess even libertarians> > would try to discourage if it was their brother> > doing it, even if they wouldn't want a law against> > it), or purposely giving their kids cancer. It just> > boggles the mind how great some people's tendency> > toward "busybody" monitoring of other people's> > configuration choices is.> > > > E.g., if I can be allowed the indulgence of picking> > on James Hughes for a moment (which I'm sure he's> > used to from me on this subject), he wrote in> > "Citizen Cyborg" that (see pages 250-251):> > > > "For instance, autism is a brain disorder one of> > whose symptoms is an inability to understand or> > interpret other people's feelings. Although the> > autistic can have wonderful compensatory savant> > abilities, just as with blindness and other> > disabilities, society has an obligation to ensure> > that as few people as possible suffer from this> > disability, and that we try to find a cure."> > > > Now, to be totally fair, Hughes has adjusted his> > views on autism specifically somewhat (though I> > would really love it if he'd re-write that section> > of the book if he ever does a 10th Anniversary> > reprint or something, because it makes my skin crawl> > even to look at that particular section) over the> > past few years. > > > > Another example: from the Google News archive, an> > article on homosexuality in Time magazine (1965)> > entitled "Homosexuality Can Be Cured" included the> > following text:> > > > "One reason why homosexuals are so rarely cured is> > that they rarely try treatment. Too many of them> > actually believe that they are happy and satisfied> > the way they are."> > > > Another article on homosexuality from Time (1966)> > entitled "The Homosexual In America" stated much of> > the psychological/sociological consensus at the time> > as follows:> > > > "There is no denying the considerable talent of a> > great many homosexuals, and ideally, talent alone> > is what should count. But the great artists so> > often cited as evidence of the homosexual's> > creativity—the Leonardos and Michelangelos —are> > probably the exceptions of genius. For the most> > part, thinks Los Angeles Psychiatrist Edward> > Stainbrook, homosexuals are failed artists, and> > their special creative gift a myth. No less an> > authority than Somerset Maugham felt that the> > homosexual, "however subtly he sees life, cannot> > see it whole," and lacks "the deep seriousness over> > certain things that normal men take seriously ... He> > has small power of invention, but a wonderful gift> > for delightful embroidery. He has vitality,> > brilliance, but seldom strength.""> > > > (I am often astounded at the parallels between> > writings on homosexuality in the 1960s and writings> > on autism -- "functioning levels" notwithstanding --> > in the 1990s-2000s, frankly.)> > > > But changing views in response to new information> > notwithstanding, I still think that book passage> > stands out as a good (albeit out of date) example of> > WHY I think that the sci-fi scenario of "humans meet> > aliens, hilarity ensues" could potentially lead to> > attempts at coercive modification or at least> > "shaming" of people who would dare to bring a> > "suboptimal" creature into existence. > > > > And that is to say that even highly educated people> > are capable of being extremely ignorant without even> > knowing it. This is not an insult -- it is just a> > fact. It isn't even a value judgment exactly --> > it's more of an attempt to point out a "weak area"> > in how some people approach various subjects. When> > someone doesn't know how deep a subject goes, and> > they don't collide with that subject often in the> > course of their daily business, they are apt to> > assume (for the sake of sheer and understandable> > cognitive parsimony) that the subject simply doesn't> > *get* any deeper than "pop science" or superficial> > (and possibly outmoded) description.> > > > Nobody can be highly educated in all areas> > simultaneously, which means that when people are> > *generally* well-educated, they still maintain a> > large portion of their "picture of the world" on the> > basis of media fictions, distortions, rumors, urban> > legends, "pop" science, etc. This can't be helped> > totally, but it can be remedied in part by pooling> > more accurate knowledge in more visible places, and> > drawing attention the difficulties in distinguishing> > a subject's facts from its collected mythologies in> > a venue at least passingly as accessible to the> > casual learner as mass media is. > > > > So, in other words, there are a lot of smart,> > well-educated people in the world who presently> > believe that huge numbers of perfectly happy and> > capable (albeit not in "typical" ways necessarily)> > are in fact suffering for the mere fact of existing> > and being configured as they are. > > > > Hence, if Earth were visited by a cadre of> > humanoid-looking aliens whose Shiny Gadget Level was> > approximately equal to ours, but who were all> > non-hearing (and who didn't see any reason why they> > should be hearing, and who had perfectly workable> > non-audio communication systems, etc.), I could see> > many humans at the very least feeling as if they had> > a moral duty to feel sorry for the aliens, seeing as> > they would never be able to enjoy opera or the sound> > of a river or what-have-you. > > > > - Anne> > > > > > "Like and equal are not the same thing at all!"> > - Meg Murry, "A Wrinkle In Time"> > > > ---------------------------------> > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them> > fast with Yahoo! Search.>> _______________________________________________> > extropy-chat mailing list> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat> > > > > > __________________________________________________________________> Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! > > http://www.flickr.com/gift/> _______________________________________________> extropy-chat mailing list> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
_________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the next generation of Windows Live
http://www.windowslive.co.uk/get-live
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20080322/fe775644/attachment.html>