Goiterzan/Amygdalai Lama@hosford42
.
It’s not that I’ve never heard it or that I don’t understand it, I’ve heard it all my life, same as you.
.
That proves how nurture can work, which we all agree happens. It does not prove how there is also a Nature. But what do they do with these cases? Change the nurturing? Or are they just going to get rid of the gene? Try to repair the Nature part?
.
#actuallyautistic @autistics
Aaron@punishmenthurts I guess I don't fully understand your question. Which gene are we talking about?
@hosford42
.
not false dichotomy, that’s the description you gave me, not one or the other. The popular versions says it’s a false dichotomy, I’m trying to say it’s a real one.
If Nurture happened and you changed, then what is your Nature? The before one, the after one, are they both? Which one is or was, Human Nature?
.
I think the whole story is just Nurture. If you have the gene and you get the environmental trigger, you change, that’s Nurture, where is their We are All the Same, Forever, Human Nature in that?
For your question, whichever one you intended, whichever one has the disposition or vulnerability that the environment affects the outcome for.
.
I don’t expect that’s getting clearer, I’m sorry. Tell me the worst part of that and I’ll keep trying. 💜
@punishmenthurts Some things do change, and some things don't. I look older than I used to, but I still have the same face. Some of my cells' DNA is damaged, but some of it is the same as it's been since I was conceived. I don't think anybody is claiming anything stays the same forever. Then death would be an obvious contradiction. Maybe what's happening here is what we in software call an "impedance mismatch". (The term is a borrowed one from electronics.) If people are using the wrong conceptual framework to describe something, the description is inherently degraded because it doesn't fit. It would make more sense to say some things change faster or slower than others. But people round off and say things stay the same, rather than saying the change really slowly. So yeah, everything about you will change given a long enough time frame. But for a lot of things, that time frame extends to the end of you as a person. For those things that last the whole time, we can say they're nature.
@hosford42
.
Nature vs Nurture is religion vs evolution. I don’t mean only epigenetic changes within a lifetime, but ongoing long term changes over generations. The Nature argument says everyone today is the same as the Biblical Adam - and honestly, the nonreligious also talk as though humans stopped changing sometime before the signs of “civilization,” appeared too. Surely you’ve heard that one about space age weapons and Palaeolithic emotions.
.
To rhe majority mind, the question asks for a creationist answer, they ask, what made us in the Before Time, they don’t ask, What makes us today? And evolution, rather than being how works always, becomes another creation story, something that happened to us only once. 💜
.
Nature vs Nurture is religion vs evolution. I don’t mean only epigenetic changes within a lifetime, but ongoing long term changes over generations. The Nature argument says everyone today is the same as the Biblical Adam - and honestly, the nonreligious also talk as though humans stopped changing sometime before the signs of “civilization,” appeared too. Surely you’ve heard that one about space age weapons and Palaeolithic emotions.
.
To rhe majority mind, the question asks for a creationist answer, they ask, what made us in the Before Time, they don’t ask, What makes us today? And evolution, rather than being how works always, becomes another creation story, something that happened to us only once. 💜
@hosford42
.
not sure you know my larger point is that we are indeed evolving under multigenerational abuse, adapting to our own abusive, self made environments, while we pretend we’re not, because of this false, supposed “Nature,” that doesn’t like to change.
.
Royal, “we.” I sometimes speak inclusively when really, I think, as in your lesson, the normal folks have the disposition, the response. Not sure anyone but Allistics do. 💜
.
not sure you know my larger point is that we are indeed evolving under multigenerational abuse, adapting to our own abusive, self made environments, while we pretend we’re not, because of this false, supposed “Nature,” that doesn’t like to change.
.
Royal, “we.” I sometimes speak inclusively when really, I think, as in your lesson, the normal folks have the disposition, the response. Not sure anyone but Allistics do. 💜
@punishmenthurts I don't think I've ever heard Nature vs Nurture used outside of an individualistic interpretation. I guess it happens sometimes in racist circles, maybe, when they claim that a certain race is a certain way by nature. But when I have used it or heard it used in personal or educational settings, it has always been about what changes in a lifetime and what doesn't, at the personal level.
@hosford42
.
This goes back a long way - I believe Lamarck was right, while the world of science says he wasn’t, Nurture adds up to evolution, evolution is adapting to an environment over generations. It’s what I said already, they think evolution has stopped, only happened in some past but not now. The refutation of Lamarck is nothing, consensus.
.
The normal mind adjusts the principles of evolution to match what they already believe, new word, same story, a creation in the past, and now a (more or less) permanent, “Nature.”
.
This goes back a long way - I believe Lamarck was right, while the world of science says he wasn’t, Nurture adds up to evolution, evolution is adapting to an environment over generations. It’s what I said already, they think evolution has stopped, only happened in some past but not now. The refutation of Lamarck is nothing, consensus.
.
The normal mind adjusts the principles of evolution to match what they already believe, new word, same story, a creation in the past, and now a (more or less) permanent, “Nature.”
@hosford42
.
I like the impedance mismatch, that’s what I’m talking about, a
neurotype mismatch in terms of how they and I think about life, words change, framing changes depending on neurotype.
.
I think it’s my science, maybe Autistic science vs NT science, but the whole world thinks NT science is everyone’s science, the only science, so they think I’m saying something else, that i can’t really be arguing with the science. But I am.
.
I like the impedance mismatch, that’s what I’m talking about, a
neurotype mismatch in terms of how they and I think about life, words change, framing changes depending on neurotype.
.
I think it’s my science, maybe Autistic science vs NT science, but the whole world thinks NT science is everyone’s science, the only science, so they think I’m saying something else, that i can’t really be arguing with the science. But I am.
@punishmenthurts In Lamarck's version of evolution, if you lost a limb, your kid born after that wouldn't have one either. If you had a scar, your kid would too.
There are some documented *limited* forms of Lamarckian evolution in biology:
* epigenetics are Lamarckian to some extent
* culture is evolution of behavior in a Lamarckian fashion, but it's a group thing, not just an individual one
Outside of biology, language itself represents a clear example of Lamarckian evolution.
Nobody in the field of biology, to my knowledge, thinks evolution has stopped, and if you were to suggest that to them, they'd be sure to correct you.
Outside of the field, there are all kinds of severe misunderstandings of it. People thinking evolution works like Pokémon, people thinking evolution works in a line with us at the end of it ("more advanced"), etc. My dad thinks evolution itself is a lie and that we are how we were created. Continuous gradual adaptive change at the population level can be hard to explain, it seems.
@hosford42
.
like anyone thought that, about limbs or playing the piano, what awful strawmen, if Lamarck thought that, we never would have heard of him. If he really did, then they chose him
as a real live strawman over someone with the real argument.
.
Yes, epigenetics was a major victory for Lamarck.
.
I think “cultural evolution,” is mad, the culture evolves because the people evolve. This is really what they think? People don’t but their culture does?
.
everyone thinks evolution has stopped for people. You wouldn’t spank or build prisons if you believed in evolution, you’d know you were pushing everything in the worst direction. Deterrence is the opposite of evolution, you’re supposed to do the opposite of adapt. Everyone quotes Wilson’s “Palaeolithic emotions,” at me. And Wilson hisself said that, at least human emotions stopped at some point. (I think it was a good sounding meaningless sound ite for him, but everybody believes it).
.
There is something missing from that mutations story, it’s passive voice, like no-one is making choices, like no-one is controlling other peoples’ environments. There is something about trying to adapt that’s missing from all
of it, about will and desire.
.
#actuallyautistic #ActualllyAutistic
#autism @autistics
.
like anyone thought that, about limbs or playing the piano, what awful strawmen, if Lamarck thought that, we never would have heard of him. If he really did, then they chose him
as a real live strawman over someone with the real argument.
.
Yes, epigenetics was a major victory for Lamarck.
.
I think “cultural evolution,” is mad, the culture evolves because the people evolve. This is really what they think? People don’t but their culture does?
.
everyone thinks evolution has stopped for people. You wouldn’t spank or build prisons if you believed in evolution, you’d know you were pushing everything in the worst direction. Deterrence is the opposite of evolution, you’re supposed to do the opposite of adapt. Everyone quotes Wilson’s “Palaeolithic emotions,” at me. And Wilson hisself said that, at least human emotions stopped at some point. (I think it was a good sounding meaningless sound ite for him, but everybody believes it).
.
There is something missing from that mutations story, it’s passive voice, like no-one is making choices, like no-one is controlling other peoples’ environments. There is something about trying to adapt that’s missing from all
of it, about will and desire.
.
#actuallyautistic #ActualllyAutistic
#autism @autistics
I looked it up and you're right about Lamarck, I think. He believed that it was more about use/disuse, like giraffes stretching their necks to reach leaves making their necks keep getting longer. I still don't agree with that, though I think it's far less absurd. Still, there has to be a *mechanism* or it can't happen. Epigenetics is a way for that sort of thing to happen, but the information bandwidth is very limited and Darwinian evolution is responsible for creating the ability for faster forms of adaptive change like epigenetics or individual behavior/learning.
> You wouldn’t spank or build prisons if you believed in evolution, you’d know you were pushing everything in the worst direction. Deterrence is the opposite of evolution, you’re supposed to do the opposite of adapt.
I am not getting your reasoning on this *at all*. I am definitely missing something in your framing of it. Maybe we are using words differently, IDK.
@punishmenthurts When people talk about culture changing... culture is literally the collective *behavioral* practices of human beings. So cultural evolution *implies* individual evolution, rather than contradicting it. You can only get cultural change if individual people change. We learn. We grow. We teach each other. That's what cultural evolution is literally made of. That's the element of intention that it seems, from my perspective, that maybe you're looking for. But I'm not sure, because I'm not confident we are using the same words to mean the same concepts.
@hosford42
.
Well, that’s selection, then, if giraffes want long necked kids, they seek long necked mates, I think that’s natural sort of knowledge, I’m not saying it’s magic, of course there’s mechanisms. But the upshot is giraffes wanted long necks and they have them.
.
So my point about people is that they have war and hate and environmental destruction, so it seems they wanted it - but No, it’s just random mutations, says your science, completely unhelpfully. 💜
.
I’ll try again about punishment in a bit.
.
Well, that’s selection, then, if giraffes want long necked kids, they seek long necked mates, I think that’s natural sort of knowledge, I’m not saying it’s magic, of course there’s mechanisms. But the upshot is giraffes wanted long necks and they have them.
.
So my point about people is that they have war and hate and environmental destruction, so it seems they wanted it - but No, it’s just random mutations, says your science, completely unhelpfully. 💜
.
I’ll try again about punishment in a bit.
@punishmenthurts I don't think the giraffes wanted long necks. I doubt they even thought about that. They just thought about whether they could reach that leaf or not. The selection comes in with the fact that the ones with longer necks *succeeded*, so they were better fed, so they survived better and had more offspring. And because it was longer-necked giraffes that were reproducing more, and offspring tend to resemble their parents, the average neck length was longer in the next generation.
Likewise, most humans didn't *want* war and violence. The problem is, in the presence of scarcity, those that forcefully take from others get a leg up, so the violent ones have more offspring, so we evolved to be assholes to each other over generations, even though in the end it sucks for everyone.
@hosford42
.
OK, you are too formidable a foe for the phone, I need more windows, I reply to the first bit and forget the rest.
.
I mean, it's not just necks, their legs are long as Hell too. So you said for them it's about food and fitness and reproduction and survival - you don't think they WANT those things? 😀
.
It's the whole world, an infodump from another neurology, so I have to back up to answer this.
.
I, uh, I don't think humans invented breeding and heredity and evolution. I think those are obvious things in the real, forever world of life before these modern, Historical Age HumansTM. I think every animal on Earth that has sexual selection knows why they do, and they are making choices for their kids' benefit.
.
I don't think these humans would have had to "discover," evolution if they hadn't spent millennia erasing this real world knowledge with their fictions about gods and creation and such.
.
Of course they want *success*
.
And gawd, you don't think people WANT something and that's why the world is going the way it is? They don't "want," war, they just all want to be warriors, for what, just in case, is what they say, isn't it. Half of everything they say is that they want to be "strong."
.
Punishment.
.
You're not alone, most don't get me about punishment.
.
The majority only know punishment for its expedience, they do not worry about any unwanted effects. or they do not mind the secondary effects - classic scenario, Mom whoops you to make you more polite, but when Dad does it, he does it to make you tough, and I suppose Dad is closer to the truth about it.
.
Punishment is the biggest thing in a human child's environment, and when it "makes you strong," as Dad says, that's an epigenetic change for an Allistic child. We hated spanking, but by puberty, we all know you "have to." That's an epigenetic change, a stage in the life cycle of a warrior ant.
.
So you say, this is, "enough," and it's "only necessary," for mutation etc., to cause change, that's like theory, armchair stuff, and it doesn't apparently know about how hard humans work to control one another's environment.
.
Deterrents are not, "virtual," they are as real a hazard as any, most hazards don't get you every time, lions don't don't even get you every time. Having the "choice," to avoid a hazard doesn't make it not real and not evolutionarily meaningful. So punishment is an environment of stress and hazard, and we have the kids drowning in cortisol, and that is having an effect, whether it is "necessary," or not. Cops and prisons are the same, but I suppose the epigenetic window has closed.
.
#actuallyautistic #ActualllyAutistic
#autism @autistics
.
OK, you are too formidable a foe for the phone, I need more windows, I reply to the first bit and forget the rest.
.
I mean, it's not just necks, their legs are long as Hell too. So you said for them it's about food and fitness and reproduction and survival - you don't think they WANT those things? 😀
.
It's the whole world, an infodump from another neurology, so I have to back up to answer this.
.
I, uh, I don't think humans invented breeding and heredity and evolution. I think those are obvious things in the real, forever world of life before these modern, Historical Age HumansTM. I think every animal on Earth that has sexual selection knows why they do, and they are making choices for their kids' benefit.
.
I don't think these humans would have had to "discover," evolution if they hadn't spent millennia erasing this real world knowledge with their fictions about gods and creation and such.
.
Of course they want *success*
.
And gawd, you don't think people WANT something and that's why the world is going the way it is? They don't "want," war, they just all want to be warriors, for what, just in case, is what they say, isn't it. Half of everything they say is that they want to be "strong."
.
Punishment.
.
You're not alone, most don't get me about punishment.
.
The majority only know punishment for its expedience, they do not worry about any unwanted effects. or they do not mind the secondary effects - classic scenario, Mom whoops you to make you more polite, but when Dad does it, he does it to make you tough, and I suppose Dad is closer to the truth about it.
.
Punishment is the biggest thing in a human child's environment, and when it "makes you strong," as Dad says, that's an epigenetic change for an Allistic child. We hated spanking, but by puberty, we all know you "have to." That's an epigenetic change, a stage in the life cycle of a warrior ant.
.
So you say, this is, "enough," and it's "only necessary," for mutation etc., to cause change, that's like theory, armchair stuff, and it doesn't apparently know about how hard humans work to control one another's environment.
.
Deterrents are not, "virtual," they are as real a hazard as any, most hazards don't get you every time, lions don't don't even get you every time. Having the "choice," to avoid a hazard doesn't make it not real and not evolutionarily meaningful. So punishment is an environment of stress and hazard, and we have the kids drowning in cortisol, and that is having an effect, whether it is "necessary," or not. Cops and prisons are the same, but I suppose the epigenetic window has closed.
.
#actuallyautistic #ActualllyAutistic
#autism @autistics
@punishmenthurts lol I'm not your foe! We can disagree and still seek mutual understanding and mutual benefit. Just to make that really clear.
> the epigenetic window has closed
Epigenetic changes are never permanent. They are fully reversible. The research that I've seen on it shows that not only are they reversible, but they rarely last more than a couple of generations. There's some doubt they even last that long.
To give you some background on where I'm coming from on all this: Aside from my more than passing interest in genetics, I have also spent ~3 decades doing experiments with genetic/evolutionary algorithms, which has given me a pretty solid understanding of how the math behind it works. Darwinian evolution is easy to implement, while Lamarckian is much less so, because it requires a certain level of sophistication to even implement. Information has two flow in bulk both ways in Lamarckian evolution, but only the survival/reproduction signal has to flow back to offspring in Darwinian evolution. (The cells in the giraffe's neck have to communicate their changes to offspring somehow.) Nature tends to pick the "low hanging fruit" and work from there, so it would make perfect sense that it would start with Darwinian and tack on Lamarckian (as epigenetics) and faster forms of learning (e.g. culture, dopamine) where it makes sense.
@punishmenthurts If this conversation does feel adversarial to you, I'm happy to drop it. No loss of respect or implied "victory" or anything like that. I'm not approaching this from an adversarial perspective in any way, and if it's having that effect, I don't want that *at all*.
@hosford42
..
it's a fun, friendly contest - like in Kill Bill 😂
.
No, it is. You're making my pull out my whole catalogue.
.
I only meant that spanking epigenetics works in childhood, I haven't considered it for adults who get punished.
.
And I'm sure that there's a path, the environment changes, the animal develops genetic options, perhaps if the environmental change becomes permanent, the old option disappears eventually, I don't know. They don't think there's any pressure to lose old genes. But I expect some changes start out on the epigenetic path and eventually become dominant. It's not really my argument exactly how daily evolution becomes permanent, except at a bird's eye view, that logically it ought to.
.
But what I call Antisocialization theory is just Allistic society making sure every child has the epigenetic change, for this lifetime, that they are "made strong," for the duration of their life. That would be bad enough if it didn't also accumulate by evolution.
.
#actuallyautistic #ActualllyAutistic
#autism @autistics
..
it's a fun, friendly contest - like in Kill Bill 😂
.
No, it is. You're making my pull out my whole catalogue.
.
I only meant that spanking epigenetics works in childhood, I haven't considered it for adults who get punished.
.
And I'm sure that there's a path, the environment changes, the animal develops genetic options, perhaps if the environmental change becomes permanent, the old option disappears eventually, I don't know. They don't think there's any pressure to lose old genes. But I expect some changes start out on the epigenetic path and eventually become dominant. It's not really my argument exactly how daily evolution becomes permanent, except at a bird's eye view, that logically it ought to.
.
But what I call Antisocialization theory is just Allistic society making sure every child has the epigenetic change, for this lifetime, that they are "made strong," for the duration of their life. That would be bad enough if it didn't also accumulate by evolution.
.
#actuallyautistic #ActualllyAutistic
#autism @autistics
@hosford42
.
So you're the scientist I'm looking for! Think about this spanking stuff I'm saying and run your math on it, please! 😀
.
So you're the scientist I'm looking for! Think about this spanking stuff I'm saying and run your math on it, please! 😀
@punishmenthurts First I have to understand precisely what it is that you're saying. Otherwise, who knows whether any results I find support or contradict your claims, if I'm testing a hypothesis that isn't the right one.
Also, setting up an experiment with this might take a lot of effort, depending on what it is that you're saying when I do finally get it. I have a lot going on in my life rn so I might not have time for it. Just to make sure I communicate that clearly up front.
@punishmenthurts I can definitely share my intuition & reasoning, at the least, though.
@hosford42
.
there's some irony about the idea of experiments.
.
If you set up a study where you spank some kids and not others, it's illegal, because of the spanking. But if you didn't, and just left those kids at home, they'd get spanked and nobody would know or care. Like, you set up a trial where there will be un-spanked kids, perhaps the only ones for thousand miles - but that's illegal, because abuse
.
It's just weird and ironic, a bit funny
.
there's some irony about the idea of experiments.
.
If you set up a study where you spank some kids and not others, it's illegal, because of the spanking. But if you didn't, and just left those kids at home, they'd get spanked and nobody would know or care. Like, you set up a trial where there will be un-spanked kids, perhaps the only ones for thousand miles - but that's illegal, because abuse
.
It's just weird and ironic, a bit funny
@punishmenthurts Oh, I was just talking about Lamarckianism vs Darwinism in *simulation*. Definitely no children should be harmed. Yikes! lol
@hosford42
@mycotropic
.
Yeah, studying that is problematic as Hell. Twenty years ago, I think 85% of Americans self reported spanking - and I think it's like masturbation, the rest are lying. Pretty impossible to find a control group.
.
I don't think I'm trying to prove a mechanism, new or old, I think I'm trying to change what counts as, "an environment." People have to survive their childhoods and some don't. If you don't have the correct response to spanking, your odds of becoming a statistic increase, the escalations can kill before the response appears - think ABA, we didn't respond, so they turn it up to eleven, total control.
.
Escalations like that happen at home, too, and kids sometimes are killed. So that's a selective pressure, a "normal," response to spanking (subservience, immediately, but, "strength," ultimately) these are responses people sometimes kill for. So spanking is a selective environment, the greatest power an environment can have - plus there are the adaptations the living make to it. 💜
.
#actuallyautistic #ActuallyAutistic
#autism @autistics
@mycotropic
.
Yeah, studying that is problematic as Hell. Twenty years ago, I think 85% of Americans self reported spanking - and I think it's like masturbation, the rest are lying. Pretty impossible to find a control group.
.
I don't think I'm trying to prove a mechanism, new or old, I think I'm trying to change what counts as, "an environment." People have to survive their childhoods and some don't. If you don't have the correct response to spanking, your odds of becoming a statistic increase, the escalations can kill before the response appears - think ABA, we didn't respond, so they turn it up to eleven, total control.
.
Escalations like that happen at home, too, and kids sometimes are killed. So that's a selective pressure, a "normal," response to spanking (subservience, immediately, but, "strength," ultimately) these are responses people sometimes kill for. So spanking is a selective environment, the greatest power an environment can have - plus there are the adaptations the living make to it. 💜
.
#actuallyautistic #ActuallyAutistic
#autism @autistics
@hosford42 @mycotropic
.
Ha - I hadn't revisited that stat since hatching maybe, LOL
85% is supposedly how many Allistics, isn't it, so they all report spanking proudly, and the ND minority are ashamed, so they're the liars 😂
.
kidding
.
Ha - I hadn't revisited that stat since hatching maybe, LOL
85% is supposedly how many Allistics, isn't it, so they all report spanking proudly, and the ND minority are ashamed, so they're the liars 😂
.
kidding
@punishmenthurts There is definitely heritability of abusive behaviors, however we want to analyze or model that from the perspective of evolutionary theory. That much is clear, and I don't think you'll get arguments from the actual researchers, either. I'm pretty sure it's the consensus. Spankees often become spankers, without some serious rethinking, effort, and intentional personal change. The same is true for many other forms of abuse.
@punishmenthurts I think where we differ most is, I don't think that necessarily even aligns with neurotypicality. My parents are both neurodivergent (even if one of them is in denial) and they still did things to "toughen me up", and I broke with that. To me, it's more of a signal of cultural change over the generations. They thought that was the right way to parent someone. I do not. I think it's traumatic, without (m?)any positive consequences, definitely none that make it worthwhile. If life is going to be shit to us, let that be what toughens us up, not pre-emptive beatings from loved ones.
@hosford42
.
I had the whole Antisocialization thing in my head all my life, and the only thing that didn't seem to make sense was me, why didn't I grow up and love Big Brother, I mean spanking?
.
Then finally a few years ago I heard the word, "Autism," and hatched, so now I think that's the difference, they have the response. The thing is, the human world is Allistic, so even Autistic parents don't automatically know any different, I wish there was a world of Allistic thought and tradition, but I don't think there is. But there is great pressure. I don't think every Autistic escapes spanking their kids. The world is a cartel of Allistic thought and behaviour, and they're not shy about enforcement. 💜
.
I had the whole Antisocialization thing in my head all my life, and the only thing that didn't seem to make sense was me, why didn't I grow up and love Big Brother, I mean spanking?
.
Then finally a few years ago I heard the word, "Autism," and hatched, so now I think that's the difference, they have the response. The thing is, the human world is Allistic, so even Autistic parents don't automatically know any different, I wish there was a world of Allistic thought and tradition, but I don't think there is. But there is great pressure. I don't think every Autistic escapes spanking their kids. The world is a cartel of Allistic thought and behaviour, and they're not shy about enforcement. 💜
@punishmenthurts On the awful power dynamic at play, you and I have always been on the same page.