* Reading for a lot of kids is the one thing they can do without someone telling them they are wrong. It also is the easiest way to stay out of the adults' way. My mom was anxious and everything I did triggered her anxiety. My uncles liked to get me out to play but they were impatient with my lack of hand-eye coordination, so it was stressful to play with them. So sitting down and reading was great. There's no way to read wrong lol. I notice this among my friends' kids who started reading at like 2 or something. There was nothing for those kids to do autonomously.
* Maybe parents don't let kids just do things on their own enough without a whole bunch of rules. Thing my kid likes best is when we're just cherishing what she's doing on her own, maybe stepping in to help a bit. Feels like highly involved parents don't let kids do this, like they want to teach kids what to do etc, which is annoying. But if a kid has learned to read already and picks up a book, or is going on a tablet, they get autonomy over there.
* I don't find nerdy Indian programmers, at least from my generation, being 'autistic' in any way. They usually tend to be highly attuned to grownups and know the right things to say and do in high visibility social situations. I think this difference between indian and american programmers probably exists because in the US, getting into nerdy things or sitting down for a long time to focus on things and persist at difficult things happens when you opt out of social stuff. The normal course of education doesn't encourage this to this extent. But in India, especially if you're Hindu, there's a lot of stuff you can get good at if you are the sort who'll sit down and focus for long hours, which is encouraged greatly by adults. You can get great at classical music, you can learn a lot of religious material, you can learn a lot of math, you can read a lot and write a lot. These things are not odd esoteric interests, but things everyone learns, so you can get quite far with some interests and the adults will be so proud of you. So reading for long durations etc fits into a social context. You don't have to do these things solo, unacknowledged.
* Every now and then in the Bay Area I come across a young person who is smart and very sensitive, and it seems like they found "their people" in a weird sex niche doing drugs. Their childhood seems to have had a lot of promise, but once they stepped out of their small town, they had a lot of trouble fitting in and ended up in a place like this. When I think of similar people I grew up with in India, they usually are really into indian classical music, and even when they move to the US, they find a group of people into classical music, and that culture typically is full of traditional, innocent people who have been trained with a lot of rigor by teachers who treat them like family, and they bring that culture into whatever new group they have for music. Those groups have a familial vibe with no ulterior motive. Even though I grew up in that culture, I feel stifled when I come across such groups, and I think that was hugely because I had this whole feeling of not belonging anywhere. I actually like them much better now lol because I've worked on my issues. Anyway, I feel like this is what those smart sensitive young people need, but in the Bay, it seems like that niche is dominated by predators.
Access to good fiction can be a lifesaver for many children! -- especially lonely ones, children from dysfunctional families, children in stressful circumstances.
> * Reading for a lot of kids is the one thing they can do without someone telling them they are wrong.
That can be a problem though. They get to feel "right over others" in their own mind, with no checks, which leaks to real (that is, when not reading) world behavior.
I've spent several days running around the web looking for more on moral narcissism. There is actually very little out there. And I am reading Simon's book I Know Best -- but that too is basically a one idea book with various political examples.
You'd think for such an important insight, there'd be lots more. It's ridiculous how much it explains that had baffled me before! And not just about the wokesters. And I've begun to wonder what we can do to create healthy boundaries in the face of its onslaught in public and private life.
Couple of moral narcissism quotes that speak to me:
"Virtue is redefined to mean believing the right things, rather than doing the right things."
"Moral narcissism is a way of explaining away evil, blaming all ills on social causes and so pushing back the necessity of examining the human soul, of not seeing the possible darkness within..."
So good you are back to writing again! How and who is the baby? :-)
I am completely in synch with your conclusion that reading does not make for a more compassionate or empathetic person. Reading does open up the world, but there are other avenues nowadays.
Your essay raises a ton of other interesting points. I am running with "moral narcissism" first, because it seems to finally answer something I have wondered about for a long time, namely the apparent disregard of consequences by the Left particularly but kinda all over the place. I have felt that calling it hypocrisy did not quite hit the nail on the head. This gives me a better tool. Thank you.
The baby is good! A little girl -- and a very easy baby compared to my first (the first spent four days in the NICU and was very clingy, for the second things went fairly smoothly and we were home and cuddling in bed three hours after she was born). Her big sister adores her :-)
I may be biased in knowing only high IQ autistic people, but the part on autistic people lacking theory of mind and cognitive empathy just feels backwards. I'm trying to juggle several ideas as I read the article and hopefully come to the comment section with something intact.
--
I enjoyed this greatly and find I'm best suited to speak around such things by way of mystical/religious terminology; as a child I was more LB and began interest in STEM, psychology and linguistic commonplace academic study, until I got tired of that, found it improper, unhelpful and learned to enjoy the merits of the so called right brain. I am much happier now residing as "The Master" in open awareness and refining myself to a point via the emissary without becoming lost in that separation. There are however a "hierarchy of masters" which I'll get into later. Quite fractal.
I'm also coming to find LB RB problematic, not by you, but in general; the methods of discussion appear to me mostly left brained--even in the attempt to get us to appreciate The Master, The Emissary steals the show!
I may be wrong but they appear to me to be 2 modes of function more so than localized definite hemisphere dependent phenomena—the midbrain acting as chooser of which program or lens, brain state to inhabit. People become rooted in a pattern of behavior for various reasons, but most people may still train themselves into the position of that controller, chooser, sovereign sort of self behind the two modes of awareness.
In magic we sort of learn to grow from LB into RB, and then from that expanded state recognize the synthesis of both via the Crown or "Throne of God" central to these opponent processing forces.
In this way Saint Michael redeems the serpent--so that both of these "angels" might serve The Lord. These left and right, dark and light, red and blue, circle square, yin yang forces are always known to be descended/subservient/permeated by a secret third to which these lesser two are "wings". This third is The Dao, or supreme God under which the apparent god and satan (L and R) are manifest.
In Steiners cosmology this would relate to Lucifer(R) and Ahriman(L), there is great risk in worshipping the right brain "as the most beautiful angel" and forgetting its necessity of subservience of something even higher than it--namely the mid brain or "Christ". There are RB dominant disorders as well, there is a required balance; I've begun calling these two poles and a third mediating force which comes into your awareness by balancing the two--I say comes into awareness because this third is from whence the latter left and right are birthed, but it becomes disguised.
The three must be balanced, but the midbrain acts as mediator and organizer—this is the point in which "consciousness" interfaces and spreads out into the body, what you refer to as "your self", that Identity, begins its unfolding from that fine point at the center of the head
We see that same tripart distinction in the head heart and limbs.
For any interested in the topics of left and right brain and want to actually begin doing practices to shift toward development of "higher mind", fixing the problems we inhabit via improper attention--let me know or read some of my work. I provide quite direct pointers to the praxis of all this, though our terms may differ, our goals are the same.
I'll need to think more / look some stuff up before I can give a good response to most of this, but regarding high IQ "autistic" people ...
Deficits in cognitive empathy are one of the defining characteristics of autism -- however, as it is used today, "autism" is an umbrella diagnosis (not one condition) and has come to mean very little. If the high IQ people you know have good cognitive empathy, my guess is that they fit one of the two profiles and are not technically autistic -- but might have received a diagnosis because neither of these are diagnoses that are given by clinicians and they can sort of look like high functioning autism.
Sub-Clinical Psychopathy
This is NOT a bad thing! Psychopathy is stigmatized, but sub-clinical psychopathy (low emotional empathy, high risk-taking, high sensation/stimulation-seeking, low concern for how others think about you) coupled with above average intelligence and above-average cognitive and compassionate empathy is basically the formula for heroism and good leadership. High emotional empathy can be paralyzing -- if you feel what other people feel, you might not be able to act on their behalf etc.
High IQ / Hyper-Mechanism
Christopher Badcock describes autism as being characterized by deficits in what he calls "mentalistic" cognition (e.g. problems with the default mode network). The other type of cognition he describes, mechanistic cognition (which is linked to the task positive network) is often high in autistic people. So some of the traits associated with autism come from hypo-mentalism, and others come from hyper-mechanism. So someone with a very high IQ, who is hyper-mechanistic, will have some positive "autistic" traits, such as hyper-sensitivity, high mechanical / tech skills etc, but will not (necessarily) have the deficits associated with hypo-mentalism (and so wouldn't have low theory of mind).
Sheesh, too bad folks on the right are still so resistant to the messages regarding psychedelics. I would love to see an interview with you with someone else than Mr. Lefty Looney over there... :-(
I understand. I just wish I could have back the half hour I spent exploring his stack. Would eye bleach help defend me from people who support Hunter Biden for president?! It's enough to take away my will to live. LOL
Except there is an obvious connection. I’ve been asking trumpees for nine years straight to tell me their top three works of literature. I’ve asked many thousands of trumpees to name their top three books. In nine years maybe two or three guys could do it. Well over 99% of trumpees have no intellectual curiosity for literature. They are not equal. Trumpees to a T are the way they are because they are severely undereducated and emotionally underdeveloped.
A few thoughts:
* Reading for a lot of kids is the one thing they can do without someone telling them they are wrong. It also is the easiest way to stay out of the adults' way. My mom was anxious and everything I did triggered her anxiety. My uncles liked to get me out to play but they were impatient with my lack of hand-eye coordination, so it was stressful to play with them. So sitting down and reading was great. There's no way to read wrong lol. I notice this among my friends' kids who started reading at like 2 or something. There was nothing for those kids to do autonomously.
* Maybe parents don't let kids just do things on their own enough without a whole bunch of rules. Thing my kid likes best is when we're just cherishing what she's doing on her own, maybe stepping in to help a bit. Feels like highly involved parents don't let kids do this, like they want to teach kids what to do etc, which is annoying. But if a kid has learned to read already and picks up a book, or is going on a tablet, they get autonomy over there.
* I don't find nerdy Indian programmers, at least from my generation, being 'autistic' in any way. They usually tend to be highly attuned to grownups and know the right things to say and do in high visibility social situations. I think this difference between indian and american programmers probably exists because in the US, getting into nerdy things or sitting down for a long time to focus on things and persist at difficult things happens when you opt out of social stuff. The normal course of education doesn't encourage this to this extent. But in India, especially if you're Hindu, there's a lot of stuff you can get good at if you are the sort who'll sit down and focus for long hours, which is encouraged greatly by adults. You can get great at classical music, you can learn a lot of religious material, you can learn a lot of math, you can read a lot and write a lot. These things are not odd esoteric interests, but things everyone learns, so you can get quite far with some interests and the adults will be so proud of you. So reading for long durations etc fits into a social context. You don't have to do these things solo, unacknowledged.
* Every now and then in the Bay Area I come across a young person who is smart and very sensitive, and it seems like they found "their people" in a weird sex niche doing drugs. Their childhood seems to have had a lot of promise, but once they stepped out of their small town, they had a lot of trouble fitting in and ended up in a place like this. When I think of similar people I grew up with in India, they usually are really into indian classical music, and even when they move to the US, they find a group of people into classical music, and that culture typically is full of traditional, innocent people who have been trained with a lot of rigor by teachers who treat them like family, and they bring that culture into whatever new group they have for music. Those groups have a familial vibe with no ulterior motive. Even though I grew up in that culture, I feel stifled when I come across such groups, and I think that was hugely because I had this whole feeling of not belonging anywhere. I actually like them much better now lol because I've worked on my issues. Anyway, I feel like this is what those smart sensitive young people need, but in the Bay, it seems like that niche is dominated by predators.
Access to good fiction can be a lifesaver for many children! -- especially lonely ones, children from dysfunctional families, children in stressful circumstances.
> * Reading for a lot of kids is the one thing they can do without someone telling them they are wrong.
That can be a problem though. They get to feel "right over others" in their own mind, with no checks, which leaks to real (that is, when not reading) world behavior.
As someone who grew up like that, the issue isn't that, it's not having much of a grip on the physical world because you don't spend much time in it.
So to come back to this essay:
I've spent several days running around the web looking for more on moral narcissism. There is actually very little out there. And I am reading Simon's book I Know Best -- but that too is basically a one idea book with various political examples.
You'd think for such an important insight, there'd be lots more. It's ridiculous how much it explains that had baffled me before! And not just about the wokesters. And I've begun to wonder what we can do to create healthy boundaries in the face of its onslaught in public and private life.
Couple of moral narcissism quotes that speak to me:
"Virtue is redefined to mean believing the right things, rather than doing the right things."
"Moral narcissism is a way of explaining away evil, blaming all ills on social causes and so pushing back the necessity of examining the human soul, of not seeing the possible darkness within..."
So good you are back to writing again! How and who is the baby? :-)
I am completely in synch with your conclusion that reading does not make for a more compassionate or empathetic person. Reading does open up the world, but there are other avenues nowadays.
Your essay raises a ton of other interesting points. I am running with "moral narcissism" first, because it seems to finally answer something I have wondered about for a long time, namely the apparent disregard of consequences by the Left particularly but kinda all over the place. I have felt that calling it hypocrisy did not quite hit the nail on the head. This gives me a better tool. Thank you.
The baby is good! A little girl -- and a very easy baby compared to my first (the first spent four days in the NICU and was very clingy, for the second things went fairly smoothly and we were home and cuddling in bed three hours after she was born). Her big sister adores her :-)
Another girl! You are truly blessed. May she thrive always! :-) 💗
What are these “other avenues” of content that you believe trumpees consume that are equal to the best of humanity’s literary works?
I may be biased in knowing only high IQ autistic people, but the part on autistic people lacking theory of mind and cognitive empathy just feels backwards. I'm trying to juggle several ideas as I read the article and hopefully come to the comment section with something intact.
--
I enjoyed this greatly and find I'm best suited to speak around such things by way of mystical/religious terminology; as a child I was more LB and began interest in STEM, psychology and linguistic commonplace academic study, until I got tired of that, found it improper, unhelpful and learned to enjoy the merits of the so called right brain. I am much happier now residing as "The Master" in open awareness and refining myself to a point via the emissary without becoming lost in that separation. There are however a "hierarchy of masters" which I'll get into later. Quite fractal.
I'm also coming to find LB RB problematic, not by you, but in general; the methods of discussion appear to me mostly left brained--even in the attempt to get us to appreciate The Master, The Emissary steals the show!
I may be wrong but they appear to me to be 2 modes of function more so than localized definite hemisphere dependent phenomena—the midbrain acting as chooser of which program or lens, brain state to inhabit. People become rooted in a pattern of behavior for various reasons, but most people may still train themselves into the position of that controller, chooser, sovereign sort of self behind the two modes of awareness.
In magic we sort of learn to grow from LB into RB, and then from that expanded state recognize the synthesis of both via the Crown or "Throne of God" central to these opponent processing forces.
In this way Saint Michael redeems the serpent--so that both of these "angels" might serve The Lord. These left and right, dark and light, red and blue, circle square, yin yang forces are always known to be descended/subservient/permeated by a secret third to which these lesser two are "wings". This third is The Dao, or supreme God under which the apparent god and satan (L and R) are manifest.
In Steiners cosmology this would relate to Lucifer(R) and Ahriman(L), there is great risk in worshipping the right brain "as the most beautiful angel" and forgetting its necessity of subservience of something even higher than it--namely the mid brain or "Christ". There are RB dominant disorders as well, there is a required balance; I've begun calling these two poles and a third mediating force which comes into your awareness by balancing the two--I say comes into awareness because this third is from whence the latter left and right are birthed, but it becomes disguised.
The three must be balanced, but the midbrain acts as mediator and organizer—this is the point in which "consciousness" interfaces and spreads out into the body, what you refer to as "your self", that Identity, begins its unfolding from that fine point at the center of the head
We see that same tripart distinction in the head heart and limbs.
For any interested in the topics of left and right brain and want to actually begin doing practices to shift toward development of "higher mind", fixing the problems we inhabit via improper attention--let me know or read some of my work. I provide quite direct pointers to the praxis of all this, though our terms may differ, our goals are the same.
I'll need to think more / look some stuff up before I can give a good response to most of this, but regarding high IQ "autistic" people ...
Deficits in cognitive empathy are one of the defining characteristics of autism -- however, as it is used today, "autism" is an umbrella diagnosis (not one condition) and has come to mean very little. If the high IQ people you know have good cognitive empathy, my guess is that they fit one of the two profiles and are not technically autistic -- but might have received a diagnosis because neither of these are diagnoses that are given by clinicians and they can sort of look like high functioning autism.
Sub-Clinical Psychopathy
This is NOT a bad thing! Psychopathy is stigmatized, but sub-clinical psychopathy (low emotional empathy, high risk-taking, high sensation/stimulation-seeking, low concern for how others think about you) coupled with above average intelligence and above-average cognitive and compassionate empathy is basically the formula for heroism and good leadership. High emotional empathy can be paralyzing -- if you feel what other people feel, you might not be able to act on their behalf etc.
High IQ / Hyper-Mechanism
Christopher Badcock describes autism as being characterized by deficits in what he calls "mentalistic" cognition (e.g. problems with the default mode network). The other type of cognition he describes, mechanistic cognition (which is linked to the task positive network) is often high in autistic people. So some of the traits associated with autism come from hypo-mentalism, and others come from hyper-mechanism. So someone with a very high IQ, who is hyper-mechanistic, will have some positive "autistic" traits, such as hyper-sensitivity, high mechanical / tech skills etc, but will not (necessarily) have the deficits associated with hypo-mentalism (and so wouldn't have low theory of mind).
What a wonderful essay.
Thank you!
Sheesh, too bad folks on the right are still so resistant to the messages regarding psychedelics. I would love to see an interview with you with someone else than Mr. Lefty Looney over there... :-(
I'm happy to talk to anyone who asks (in good faith). I enjoyed the conversation with DLA!
I understand. I just wish I could have back the half hour I spent exploring his stack. Would eye bleach help defend me from people who support Hunter Biden for president?! It's enough to take away my will to live. LOL
Except there is an obvious connection. I’ve been asking trumpees for nine years straight to tell me their top three works of literature. I’ve asked many thousands of trumpees to name their top three books. In nine years maybe two or three guys could do it. Well over 99% of trumpees have no intellectual curiosity for literature. They are not equal. Trumpees to a T are the way they are because they are severely undereducated and emotionally underdeveloped.