This is definitely not another thread about theism vs. atheism. (OK, it is.)

[In_Spiration]

A relatively popular Science blog I follow, Discover’s Gene Expression by Razib Khan (“a libertarian-leaning atheist”), has had two posts since yesterday about the probably significant link between atheism and “autistic-spectrum disorders” (ASD) such as high-functioning autism (HFA).

*1) Among two equivalent demographic samples differentiated by autism diagnosis state, the high functioning autistics are much more likely to be atheists.

1. Among a sample of autistics and neurotypicals those who are atheists have the highest “autism quotient.”*

The first post, “Atheism as mental deviance”, highlights the research and quickly hashes out some of Razib’s own thoughts about the results, which he finds interesting on an almost exclusively psychological level. In the second, “What atheism and autism may have in common”, he clarifies some further points about “theory of mind” (ToM)* and the evolutionary psychology of religion, namely the adaptive, instinctive aspects of religious impulses that have been widely found in mentally healthy humans since the dawn of history.

As soon as I get the next substantial urge to procrastinate, perhaps I’ll get around to sharing a couple of my own ideas regarding the subject. (Well, I suppose right now counts, so, briefly: In line with this writer, I actually tend to consider “autistic-like” thought, or “theory of reality”, to be in general superior to ToM; in other words, if an evil genius forced me to choose one or the other, I’d ultimately have to side with “ToR”. Note: I am a conservative-leaning Catholic, in case anyone cares.) For the time being, though, I’m mostly just curious about what impressions and opinions y’all have here. And “y’all” includes theists, atheists, agnostics, et al. Finally, I hope everyone can manage to withhold any & all unnecessary personal/emotional investment while posting in this thread, as well as in the Battle for Inner-net Victory that inevitably ensues.

*Here is one article explaining the evolutionary psychology behind ToM delusions. It’s written by Bruce G. Charlton, Professor of Theoretical Medicine at the University of Buckingham, UK, whose blog I also follow. Incidentally, he’s got another unique take on some of the purely psychological aspects of atheism and religion. So, in case anyone still reading really likes religious psychology, you might wish to ponder an unconventional argument BGC once developed concerning a potential “No God” delusion. I can’t find any links to the work itself; however, Bill Vallicella considers it (and finds it wanting) here, complete with a special guest appearance in the com-box.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

A relatively popular Science blog I follow, Discover’s Gene Expression by Razib Khan (“a libertarian-leaning atheist”), has had two posts since yesterday about the probably significant link between atheism and “autistic-spectrum disorders” (ASD) such as high-functioning autism (HFA).

*1) Among two equivalent demographic samples differentiated by autism diagnosis state, the high functioning autistics are much more likely to be atheists.

1. Among a sample of autistics and neurotypicals those who are atheists have the highest “autism quotient.”*

The first post, “Atheism as mental deviance”, highlights the research and quickly hashes out some of Razib’s own thoughts about the results, which he finds interesting on an almost exclusively psychological level. In the second, “What atheism and autism may have in common”, he clarifies some further points about “theory of mind” (ToM)* and the evolutionary psychology of religion, namely the adaptive, instinctive aspects of religious impulses that have been widely found in mentally healthy humans since the dawn of history.

As soon as I get the next substantial urge to procrastinate, perhaps I’ll get around to sharing a couple of my own ideas regarding the subject. (Well, I suppose right now counts, so, briefly: In line with this writer, I actually tend to consider “autistic-like” thought, or “theory of reality”, to be in general superior to ToM; in other words, if an evil genius forced me to choose one or the other, I’d ultimately have to side with “ToR”. Note: I am a conservative-leaning Catholic, in case anyone cares.) For the time being, though, I’m mostly just curious about what impressions and opinions y’all have here. And “y’all” includes theists, atheists, agnostics, et al. Finally, I hope everyone can manage to withhold any & all unnecessary personal/emotional investment while posting in this thread, as well as in the Battle for Inner-net Victory that inevitably ensues.

*Here is one article explaining the evolutionary psychology behind ToM delusions. It’s written by Bruce G. Charlton, Professor of Theoretical Medicine at the University of Buckingham, UK, whose blog I also follow. Incidentally, he’s got another unique take on some of the purely psychological aspects of atheism and religion. So, in case anyone still reading really likes religious psychology, you might wish to ponder an unconventional argument BGC once developed concerning a potential “No God” delusion. I can’t find any links to the work itself; however, Bill Vallicella considers it (and finds it wanting) here, complete with a special guest appearance in the com-box.

I quote by memory. meditation, according to experiences with brain scan, open the spot of the brain that keeps the notion of limit.

 

[John_Russell_Jr]

… my dear friend ,

… i have a degree of autism and dyslexia , but i am certainly not atheist , and although i feel many may disagree due to misunderstandings as is so common here it does not interfere with my ability to solve problems at all , rather , in my opine , it enhances thus ability , and i find when i understand a problem eg it’s explained in language i understand , i can solve most any problem given a little time be it religious or other , and the easiest problem to solve is does god exist , but putting aside revelation it’s virtually impossible to go further on the q of god as to who and what he is , but i have solved many age old q’s about god never sufficiently resolved , others may disagree as said , but that’s because i think a bit differently , and what i understand others may not , don’t we all have this prob though …

… these so called disorders can often be the greatest blessings , but sometimes they are afflictions , but atheism requires more faith to believe than any other faith – the atheists can’t figure it out – that is all , i’m not talking about myself but many of our greatest geniuses had these so called disorders and were men of god , i reject any atheist claims saying higher intelligence leads to atheism , they seem to be thinking man is evolving intellectually to the point where he no longer needs a superstitious deity , atheists have the need to sound like geniuses , and don’t we see it so much , but none have ever solved a single prob , and like all men they keep making more probs endlessly , if they can’t understand god exists then this is due to severe mental deficiency , the problem is the fallen mind has the ability to acquire knowledge no probs and can even have a photographic memory , but it’s understanding and appreciation which are the vital aspects needed have only maybe 5 or 10 % of their potential active as a result of the loss of the preternatural gifts and the little left is messy and chaotic , so the more they study and learn the more confused they get , and it gets so bad they can’t even solve a single little problem , although they delude themselves they can …

… look at what atheism offers as a faith for instance – a miserable existence where there’s usually endless sickness , sufferings and difficulties and we have a body decaying and corrupting from the moment of conception but we must be positive and seek to get as much joy and pleasure out of this brief life as we can vbecause death can come anytime or very soon and then we’re gone , what a depressing faith , pure misery , even if they think believers are deluded they should look at the benefits of say catholicism – everything has infinite meaning , purpose , value and life is a blessing and something to be treasured , and a true catholic is always full of hope and optimism and cheer and serenity no matter what because there is always a reason even in the greatest trials and death is but a gateway to eternal sheer ecstatic heavenly bliss and there’s no end to the wonderful beauty of our holy catholic faith , why would one choose atheism which is all nothing / ness against catholicism which is mans every possible dream come true and infinitely beyond what his heart can even begin to imagine it desires it is so magnificent , if they think we’re deluded how do they know they are not , and which delusion should one choose ??? , as for me i know the truth and will never be atheist , it’s sheer insanity …

… may god bless and love you ,

… john …

 

[In_Spiration]

Hi John Russell Jr,

i have a degree of autism and dyslexia , but i am certainly not atheist , and although i feel many may disagree due to misunderstandings as is so common here it does not interfere with my ability to solve problems at all , rather , in my opine , it enhances thus ability , and i find when i understand a problem eg it’s explained in language i understand , i can solve most any problem given a little time be it religious or other

I certainly wasn’t suggesting that autistics are lacking in a capacity for problem-solving (in the technical sense). That’s why I made sure to mention my ultimate prioritization of the very neurotype which ASDs are deemed to possess in excess. If anything, strict logical consistency is better-suited for autistic folks. If you look at this paper (entitled, “Explaining Enhanced Logical Consistency during Decision Making in Autism”) you’ll find one documented advantage that ASDs have over “neurotypicals”. Its conclusion:

An ability to incorporate a broad range of contextual cues into the decision process endows humans with a clear evolutionary advantage. This requirement becomes particularly acute when making decisions in social environments in which multiple subtle contextual cues carry critical information. We suggest that competence in dealing with social uncertainty involves deployment of affect heuristics. In ASD, a reduction of framing effect might explain both enhanced analytic and impoverished social abilities, the latter reflecting an inability to deploy an affect heuristic in complex and uncertain social contexts. Thus, our findings suggest a potential core neurobiological deficit in ASD and also speak to limits, and trade-offs, in human rationality.

Someone with autism is more prone to think objectively and impartially; he is, in fact, the most characteristically likely to heed the earlier call I made for reduced emotional investment within this thread. This is, of course, not unrelated to the fact he suffers from a diminished fluency with social cues, rules, indirect innuendos, etc. I’m inclined to claim that the root problem of “autistic excess” is that it (arguably) only emphasizes principle/objective law/mechanism [material & efficient causality] at the expense of subjective intent/signalling/communication [formal & final causality]. It’s not so surprising, then, that many view the universe solely as a sort of purposeless process absent any Divine Intention, especially in light of the fact they’ll be similarly inclined to see people as mere animals operating according to bio-mechanics alone.

 

[In_Spiration]

[Continued…]

and the easiest problem to solve is does god exist , but putting aside revelation it’s virtually impossible to go further on the q of god as to who and what he is , but i have solved many age old q’s about god never sufficiently resolved , others may disagree as said , but that’s because i think a bit differently , and what i understand others may not , don’t we all have this prob though

It sounds like your belief in God may be more attributable to a principled system of objective, logical analysis that you direct at the specific “puzzles” you find in the world. If so, know that it’s a much less common motivation for religious belief when compared to the vast majority of theists throughout civilization. For a lot of Christians, if a substantial quantity of their more intuitive, personal awareness of a loving Father were taken away, and they instead had to rely more on a theoretical grasp of his metaphysical necessity after rigorous philosophical methods, their faith might indeed gradually falter. I think the analytical path to God has got to be the more difficult one, because there are infinitely more ways to make wrong turns amid the complexity of Reason, and abstract processes will always strike the self as more dubious, more remote, and less motivational than the immediacy of “just feeling it”.

these so called disorders can often be the greatest blessings , but sometimes they are afflictions , but atheism requires more faith to believe than any other faith – the atheists can’t figure it out – that is all , i’m not talking about myself but many of our greatest geniuses had these so called disorders and were men of god

No dispute there. I think many details from various biographies on Aquinas suggest he lay somewhere on the autistic spectrum. Chesterton, too. Moreover, autism and schizophrenia aren’t mutually exclusive, either, and those with both extremes seem like they’d be prime candidates as creative geniuses (see: John Nash, the historical basis for A Beautiful Mind).

i reject any atheist claims saying higher intelligence leads to atheism , they seem to be thinking man is evolving intellectually to the point where he no longer needs a superstitious deity , atheists have the need to sound like geniuses , and don’t we see it so much , but none have ever solved a single prob , and like all men they keep making more probs endlessly , if they can’t understand god exists then this is due to severe mental deficiency

First, some research does indicate a higher IQ being correlated with atheism (and liberalism), which wouldn’t surprise me (even as a conservative theist). I’m not saying the study is air-tight, but neither am I much motivated to deny its content, mainly because there’s nothing threatening or probative for anyone to conclude from it. I’m more curious as to what it might, if true, imply about human nature. Second, “intelligence” is usually associated with a particular sort of abstract problem-solving via conceptual manipulation and such, but it could potentially be classified broadly as a personality trait instead (Eysenck’s “Openness” among the “Big Five”, or aptitude for novelty-seeking, tendency to adapt to unknown environments, and the like); it’s not necessarily limited to just a test-taking capacity that “intellectuals” manifest with excellence. Now, it may be just as likely that a clever atheist is more disposed to atheism by way of some other, temperamental orientation, and not as a rationally pure consequence of unbiased judgment or chains of logic. I’d argue that, if intention and purpose are truly inherent within all aspects of the world, anyone who is fundamentally handicapped when it comes to recognizing exhibitions of agency is mentally deficient, not “more enlightened”. (But of course it ultimately comes down to a simple matter of who’s right, i.e., “enlightenment” obviously presupposes truth.)

An autistic atheist, not surprisingly, seems to just view ascriptions of intent very skeptically, only accepting them in the clearer cases, such as with human activity and nothing else, although the objectivity-oriented scientists are always sliding down a slippery slope of reductionism even regarding Man. Anyway, so much of this discussion is a matter of degree, and that makes it hard to establish clear definitions and specification (which is probably why I’ve been continuously nagged by a desire to add qualifications to everything I said just now).

 

[John_Russell_Jr]

[Continued…]

It sounds like your belief in God may be more attributable to a principled system of objective, logical analysis that you direct at the specific “puzzles” you find in the world. If so, know that it’s a much less common motivation for religious belief when compared to the vast majority of theists throughout civilization. For a lot of Christians, if a substantial quantity of their more intuitive, personal awareness of a loving Father were taken away, and they instead had to rely more on a theoretical grasp of his metaphysical necessity after rigorous philosophical methods, their faith might indeed gradually falter. I think the analytical path to God has got to be the more difficult one, because there are infinitely more ways to make wrong turns amid the complexity of Reason, and abstract processes will always strike the self as more dubious, more remote, and less motivational than the immediacy of “just feeling it”.

No dispute there. I think many details from various biographies on Aquinas suggest he lay somewhere on the autistic spectrum. Chesterton, too. Moreover, autism and schizophrenia aren’t mutually exclusive, either, and those with both extremes seem like they’d be prime candidates as creative geniuses (see: John Nash, the historical basis for A Beautiful Mind).

First, some research does indicate a higher IQ being correlated with atheism (and liberalism), which wouldn’t surprise me (even as a conservative theist). I’m not saying the study is air-tight, but neither am I much motivated to deny its content, mainly because there’s nothing threatening or probative for anyone to conclude from it. I’m more curious as to what it might, if true, imply about human nature. Second, “intelligence” is usually associated with a particular sort of abstract problem-solving via conceptual manipulation and such, but it could potentially be classified broadly as a personality trait instead (Eysenck’s “Openness” among the “Big Five”, or aptitude for novelty-seeking, tendency to adapt to unknown environments, and the like); it’s not necessarily limited to just a test-taking capacity that “intellectuals” manifest with excellence. Now, it may be just as likely that a clever atheist is more disposed to atheism by way of some other, temperamental orientation, and not as a rationally pure consequence of unbiased judgment or chains of logic. I’d argue that, if intention and purpose are truly inherent within all aspects of the world, anyone who is fundamentally handicapped when it comes to recognizing exhibitions of agency is mentally deficient, not “more enlightened”. (But of course it ultimately comes down to a simple matter of who’s right, i.e., “enlightenment” obviously presupposes truth.)

An autistic atheist, not surprisingly, seems to just view ascriptions of intent very skeptically, only accepting them in the clearer cases, such as with human activity and nothing else, although the objectivity-oriented scientists are always sliding down a slippery slope of reductionism even regarding Man. Anyway, so much of this discussion is a matter of degree, and that makes it hard to establish clear definitions and specification (which is probably why I’ve been continuously nagged by a desire to add qualifications to everything I said just now).

… my dear friend ,

… many thx for your in depth replies , i’ve reead them twice and understand partly what you say , but i’m not familiar with some words , terms , codes and perhaps styles , methodologies , systems and concepts , i don’t have training in the language and code you mostly use is it , but i’d love to talk to you about the human mind and really any subject if you can talk in plain oerdinary english , the problem solving is not a prob for me but if i don’t understand exacrly what your saying to a sufficient degree then there is pure communication breakdown , i have a lot to say and discuss and contribute on these subjects but i need you to follow the quote in your signature dear friend , if you can’t that’s fine , if you do we talk , either way we are still brothers and no probs …

… may god bless and love you ,

… john …