←back to thread

A human-accelerated neuron type potentially underlying autism in humans

(academic.oup.com)
185 points ivewonyoung | 9 comments | 28 Sep 25 23:32 UTC | HN request time: 0.368s | source | bottom
Show context
petermcneeley ◴[29 Sep 25 01:15 UTC] No.45409539[source]▶
What if it is more like Vegeta's super saiyan 2. A false super saiyan 2 form. Just like the real SS2 maintains both power and agility the real Übermensch will attain new levels of IQ while maintaining if not advancing a strong EQ.

https://dragonball.fandom.com/wiki/Super_Saiyan_Second_Grade

replies(7): >>45409563 #>>45409572 #>>45409600 #>>45409912 #>>45410005 #>>45410282 #>>45411029 #
1. Insanity ◴[29 Sep 25 01:20 UTC] No.45409572[source]▶
lol that’s an interesting comparison. Another angle is that our categorization of what is atypical is the actual problem, and not the symptom itself.
replies(3): >>45409841 #>>45410127 #>>45411154 #
2. greesil ◴[29 Sep 25 02:23 UTC] No.45409841[source]▶
’round these parts it's not atypical. Merely a categorization. Goddamn auties are so stubborn though, my way or the highway all the way. Okay bub, go explore and ignore the team priorities.

Curse yer down votes, tell me rigidity isn't a manifestation of the condition.

replies(1): >>45410968 #
3. throwup238 ◴[29 Sep 25 03:40 UTC] No.45410127[source]▶
> Another angle is that our categorization of what is atypical is the actual problem, and not the symptom itself.

I wouldn't call it a problem so much as a fundamental aspect to human psychology as a clinical science. A lot of mental disorders are only really diagnosable by the impact the disorder has on the individual's life because of the fundamental limitations on external observers so at some point we have to draw a line or create a spectrum of what is considered "typical".

4. Muromec ◴[29 Sep 25 06:46 UTC] No.45410968[source]▶
You are unfortunately totally right
5. mort96 ◴[29 Sep 25 07:24 UTC] No.45411154[source]▶
IMO the issue is that we use the term "autism" for two wildly different things. We use it for perfectly functional people who are more sensitive than usual to crowds and noise and prefers a somewhat different style of communication than most people. And we use it for completely non-functional people who can't communicate at all and don't understand what's being communicated to them and throw violent temper tantrums as adults. I understand that there are probably reasons why these share the same medical term, but I believe we should use different colloquial terms for the two.
replies(2): >>45411334 #>>45414696 #
6. jagaerglad ◴[29 Sep 25 07:57 UTC] No.45411334[source]▶
the "level 1, 2 or 3 autism" has started to gain colloquial traction recently
replies(1): >>45415893 #
7. jwatte ◴[29 Sep 25 15:01 UTC] No.45414696[source]▶
We had it, it was called "Aspie," but somehow that wasn't good enough.
8. kridsdale1 ◴[29 Sep 25 16:47 UTC] No.45415893{3}[source]▶
Isn’t that straight out of the DSM 5?
replies(1): >>45418671 #
9. depr ◴[29 Sep 25 20:57 UTC] No.45418671{4}[source]▶
Yes