3 ms·

blaming Neanderthals for most things is a gross over-simplification and misdirects reader's attention towards genetics. While there is some humour to it, I woul

blaming Neanderthals for most things is a gross over-simplification and misdirects reader's attention towards genetics. While there is some humour to it, I would be cautious of giving into unwarranted fixation towards genetics, as we no longer live in the world where it needs to be defended against Lamarckism and like. I posit that the "runtime environment" i.e. epigentics, among other things, has a far traceable cause than the smidge of related species. The nature and consequences of autism land me to believe that it's more likely a consequence of a compiler error, although shoddy source code could be a secondary/compounding cause for it. Take Down's Syndrome as an prime example of genetic disorder, and it becomes clear why such categorization does not work for autism: autism is too broad, it describes the effect rather than cause, and I'd argue that autism is far less debilitating (pronounced) and definitely not inherited.

mrangle 2y ago
Autism is definitely not inherited? Autism being "too broad" is why it doesn't have a genetic cause? Autism's nomenclature not being descriptive enough is why it doesn't have a genetic cause? Autism not being as debilitating as DS is why it doesn't have a genetic cause? (developmental logic aside, are you familiar with Type 2 and Type 3 autistic individuals?). Extra dings for not for over-use of CS analogy, "unwarranted fixation", and "we no longer live in the world".
- jabowery 2y ago
  In identical twins, autism and homosexuality both have about the same rate of non-occurrence between the twins: 50%. This means, of course, that autists and gays are "born, not made" by the environment. Move along. Nothing to see here.
- jfyi 2y ago
  We know for a fact that there are genetic markers for autism. Analogies aside, they were arguing it is a mix of genetic and epigenetic factors and that, generally, we only pay attention to the genetics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics_of_autism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics_of_autism I think the real problem here is this can potentially be a politically heated take. I don't believe it is in this case, or they were making an effort to not make it so. Of course, that is just my reading of it.
- astrange 2y ago
  "Inherited" and "genetic" are not the same thing. Or rather, "genetic" vs "environment" are not two separate causes for things.

mrangle 2y ago

Autism is definitely not inherited? Autism being "too broad" is why it doesn't have a genetic cause? Autism's nomenclature not being descriptive enough is why it doesn't have a genetic cause? Autism not being as debilitating as DS is why it doesn't have a genetic cause? (developmental logic aside, are you familiar with Type 2 and Type 3 autistic individuals?). Extra dings for not for over-use of CS analogy, "unwarranted fixation", and "we no longer live in the world".

jabowery 2y ago
In identical twins, autism and homosexuality both have about the same rate of non-occurrence between the twins: 50%. This means, of course, that autists and gays are "born, not made" by the environment. Move along. Nothing to see here.
jfyi 2y ago
We know for a fact that there are genetic markers for autism. Analogies aside, they were arguing it is a mix of genetic and epigenetic factors and that, generally, we only pay attention to the genetics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics_of_autism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics_of_autism I think the real problem here is this can potentially be a politically heated take. I don't believe it is in this case, or they were making an effort to not make it so. Of course, that is just my reading of it.
astrange 2y ago
"Inherited" and "genetic" are not the same thing. Or rather, "genetic" vs "environment" are not two separate causes for things.