My own #ActuallyAutistic ideas on #neurodiversity and human society. Just trying to get this down as concisely as I can, so definitely skimping on the explanations and justifications. Honestly, this is largely speculation, but I'd love to see some good research done on these kinds of ideas. It would be more useful than all the eugenics crap they are wasting money on to identify #autistic genetics so they can remove us from the gene pool.

1. #Neurodiversity in humans isn't a problem or genetic mistake. It's a natural and important part of what makes us human.

2. The #neurotypical (NT) neurotype shouldn't be assumed to be the healthy or correct one, but only the most common one. To be specific, it is not the baseline from which all other neurotypes diverge. (It also needs a different name, but let's not fight that battle today.)

3. Early humans must have had a diversity of neurotypes, just as we do today, but the NT type didn't dominate in pre-agrarian tribal life. Different neurotypes had different strengths and contributed to the success of the tribe in different ways.

4. The NT neurotype can be characterized, as we do with #neurodivergent types. The most prominent attribute is their ability to acquire useful information socially (as opposed to other types which prefer to get information through study, observation and analysis, or other ways). NTs have cognitive shortcuts that help them validate a social information source as trustworthy based on non-verbal signals or social hierarchy. This also lets them align on goals and coordinate activity across large groups more easily.

5. As agriculture allowed prehistoric human communities to scale up to larger sizes, the NT neurotype became more prominent. NTs thrive in large communities where social connections and hierarchy are the dominant factor in success, while other neurotypes are less well suited for navigating large social structures with complex dynamics.

6. As NTs prospered, their influence on society increased, and social norms adapted to the way they naturally did things. Society became better suited to NTs and more difficult for other neurotypes, so NTs had an even larger advantage, had more success, bigger families, and grew to dominate the population both socially and genetically.

7. Over time, the NT ability to function effectively in a population of millions has changed human society from being balanced and inclusive of a diversity of neurotypes, to being entirely dominated by one neurotype. NTs only have to learn how to coexist with each other, but all other neurotypes must learn how to exist under NT dominance. Welcome to neurosupremacy. (see #SocialModelOfDisability)

8. The NT cognitive ability to validate trustworthiness is not infallible, especially when talking to other neurotypes. They can easily mistake honest autistic communication as deception or insincerity, or ADHD sporadic attention as disinterest or rejection. (see #DoubleEmpathyProblem)

9. Those NT cognitive shortcuts have failure modes, and can be taken advantage of. For example: charismatic cult leaders, conspiracy theories, mass marketing.

10. A Humanity of only NTs would probably fall apart in a generation or two. Being neurotypical is great for sharing known information, but take a good look at history and you'll see how much of civilization was discovered and invented by neurodivergent folk. Some of us like to speculate about historical inventors and scientists who might have been Autistic, for good reason. There's most likely also other important people throughout history of other neurotypes that are harder to recognize. Today, we need more a more balanced population and more inclusive norms, as we still rely on the cognitive strengths of non-typical neurotypes. NDs are now a scarce resource and need to be respected and protected, for the good of the species.

@joshsusser @actuallyautistic

My wrinkle in thus evolutionary model is the proposition that NT succeeds at low-cost converted group action in a stable situation (environment, climate, social structure), but that ND succeeds at adaptive responses to environmental changes. During tens of thousands of years, bands of humans that were mostly NT and a few ND survived best by thriving during stable times and surviving through unstable times. Hence, the majority/minority distribution.

@GTMLosAngeles @joshsusser @actuallyautistic
. . . just, are you saying the proportions were the same, would be the same, 90/10 or whatever?

@punishmenthurts @joshsusser @actuallyautistic The proportions, whatever they are, represent the “fittest” arrangement for groups of 100-200 humans fir a long chunk of prehistoric time.