115 replies to this topic

[Balloon guy]

Link to StoryPeople with 'mild' forms of autism are more likely to be atheists, according to a controversial new study - and more likely to shun organised religion in general. The study, which looked at posts on autism forums, focused on people with high-functioning autism such as Asperger's. The study, from University of Boston, speculates that common autistic spectrum behaviours such as 'a preference for logical beliefs' and a distrust of metaphor and figures of speech, could be responsible

[speedz99]

Balloon guy, on Tuesday, September 27th, 2011, 8:19 AM, said:

The study, from University of Boston, speculates that common autistic spectrum behaviours such as 'a preference for logical beliefs' and a distrust of metaphor and figures of speech, could be responsible[/i]

Well, yeah.

[Balloon guy]

speedz99, on Tuesday, September 27th, 2011, 9:49 AM, said:

Well, yeah.

You're an excellent poster...excellent poster.

[Balloon guy]

In a related story. Michelle Bachman came out with this statement:"Its now proven that vaccines cause atheism, so we must stop vaccines before the world is turned stupider"

[vbnautilus]

Nice thread, BG.

Balloon guy, on Tuesday, September 27th, 2011, 9:19 AM, said:

The study, from University of Boston, speculates that common autistic spectrum behaviours such as 'a preference for logical beliefs

[Balloon guy]

You win..autism is the new #winner

[vbnautilus]

Balloon guy, on Tuesday, September 27th, 2011, 10:43 AM, said:

You win..autism is the new #winner

Autism is considered a spectrum, in that there are certain features, which are present in the general population, that when exaggerated to a great enough degree become debilitating. For instance, Simon Baron-Cohen has made arguments that autism is an example of an "extreme form of the male brain" (and more recently, that this phenomenon becomes more likely when technologically-minded people start breeding with each other).So "mild" autism is not neccesarily a problem, its more of a personality style, depending on how mild they consider mild. The other factor here is that people with autism are less likely to attribute intentions to things (they have impaired "theory of mind") so they are not going to be prone to thinking there is a spirit behind everything that happens. It is interesting how true impairment can sometimes lead to certain abilities getting better. For instance, people with aphasia (acquired language disorder due to brain damage) are better at determining when someone is lying, because they are not distracted by the meaning of the speech and therefore see all the facial microexpressions better. It would be interesting if people with autism, free of our tendency to personify everything, are more adept at logical thinking.

[speedz99]

Balloon guy, on Tuesday, September 27th, 2011, 9:04 AM, said:

You're an excellent poster...excellent poster.

Well, yeah.

[LimbaughGod]

They only threw in the "logical" bull hockey because psychology is a nasty pseudo-science that has incredibly liberal bias. Take a look at this nonsense "psychology" paper (with a bunch of "citations" at the end LOL) which comes up with stuff like:"It is no secret that many American adults reject some scientific ideas. In a 2005 Pew Trust poll, for instance, 42% of respondents said that they believed that humans and other animals have existed in their present form since the beginning of time. A substantial minority of Americans, then, deny that evolution has even taken place, making them more radical than "Intelligent Design" theorists, who deny only that natural selection can explain complex design. But evolution is not the only domain in which people reject science: Many believe in the efficacy of unproven medical interventions, the mystical nature of out-of-body experiences, the existence of supernatural entities such as ghosts and fairies, and the legitimacy of astrology, ESP, and divination. There are two common assumptions about the nature of this resistance. First, it is often assumed to be a particularly American problem, explained in terms of the strong religious beliefs of many American citizens and the anti-science leanings of the dominant political party. Second, the problem is often characterized as the result of insufficient exposure to the relevant scientific facts, and hence is best addressed with improved science education.We believe that these assumptions, while not completely false, reflect a misunderstanding of the nature of this phenomenon. While cultural factors are plainly relevant, American adults' resistance to scientific ideas reflects universal facts about what children know and how children learn. If this is right, then resistance to science cannot be simply addressed through more education; something different is needed."If you read it you'll see that basically they are saying that common sense is dumb (LOL) and that we religious people are like children. helllllooooo liberal bias.

[vbnautilus]

take that, science!

[LimbaughGod]

vbnautilus, on Tuesday, September 27th, 2011, 5:03 PM, said:

take that, science!

Ohhhhhh, nice sciency retort. *sigh*

[Mercury69]

speedz99, on Tuesday, September 27th, 2011, 12:49 PM, said:

Well, yeah.

Balloon guy, on Tuesday, September 27th, 2011, 1:04 PM, said:

You're an excellent poster...excellent poster.

Jeopardy's on at 4

[solderz]

[timwakefield]

Study shows that people with autism have a higher preference for X.You: People who like X have autism!!This is one of the most blatant, simplest types of logical error that I can think of. People with Down's Syndrome have a higher-than-normal predilection for ice cream. Thus, anybody who loves ice cream has Down's Syndrome. That's an example of using your mistaken-logic.

[Balloon guy]

timwakefield, on Wednesday, September 28th, 2011, 5:02 PM, said:

Study shows that people with autism have a higher preference for X.You: People who like X have autism!!This is one of the most blatant, simplest types of logical error that I can think of. People with Down's Syndrome have a higher-than-normal predilection for ice cream. Thus, anybody who loves ice cream has Down's Syndrome. That's an example of using your mistaken-logic.

Are you talking to me?Or the people who did this study and made this conclusion?The University of Boston?Of course the rest of the people here are saying that their autism is a good thing...I guess you don't like being wrong headed and are lashing out at the messenger?

[timwakefield]

Balloon guy, on Thursday, September 29th, 2011, 12:47 AM, said:

Are you talking to me?Or the people who did this study and made this conclusion?

I was talking to you, regarding the ridiculous title of this thread, because that is very plainly not the conclusion made by the people who undertook this study. People with mild autism are more likely to be atheists than people without mild autism is so plainly not the same thing as People who are atheists have mild autism, which is what your thread title essentially says. I find it impossible to believe that you don't understand this discrepancy.

[solderz]

timwakefield, on Wednesday, September 28th, 2011, 11:51 PM, said:

I was talking to you, regarding the ridiculous title of this thread, because that is very plainly not the conclusion made by the people who undertook this study. People with mild autism are more likely to be atheists than people without mild autism is so plainly not the same thing as People who are atheists have mild autism, which is what your thread title essentially says. I find it impossible to believe that you don't understand this discrepancy.

How can you find that impossible to believe? He doesn't understand much of anything.

[LongLiveYorke]

timwakefield, on Thursday, September 29th, 2011, 3:51 AM, said:

I find it impossible to believe that you don't understand this discrepancy.

Let's say that there are 100 people. 30 of them are wearing red pants, 70 of them are wearing blue pants.Some 20 of them are also wearing hats. Of those wearing hats, 8 are wearing red pants, and 12 are wearing blue pants.A guy goes around studying the people who wear hats. He says that the majority of people who wear hats have blue pants. And he's right. The percentages are:Probability of blue pants based on having a hat = 12/20 = 60%Probability of red pants based on having a hat = 8/20 = 40%However, another guys looks at the total population. He finds that people with red pants are MORE likely to be wearing a hat than a person with blue pants:Probability of hat based on red pants = 8/30 = ~27%Probability of hat based on blue pants = 12/70 = ~17%

[vbnautilus]

haha yorke we're talking about religion, not pants.

[SuperJon]

vbnautilus, on Thursday, September 29th, 2011, 1:29 PM, said:

haha yorke we're talking about religion, not pants.

what's teh difference?