Hacker News Reader

Comment by helboi4 | Hacker News Reader

I'm not sure about that. Being unable to anticipate context sounds terrible for pretty much any task. Having to think through every step of anything is terrible. Not being able to form sentences fluently and instead having to arrange them like puzzles is far too time consuming. The article literally is explaining how a large cerebellum is crucial for humans' high intelligence. Reallocating resources to other parts of the brain would make us stupider.

View on HN

Having no context does allow for a fresh perspective...

Having to think things through slowly step by step may reveal errors other's glossed over...

the cerebellum is important. But maybe, since we really know less about the brain than we think we do, differently wired does not equate 'stupider'. It takes all sorts to make a world.

I agree with the language part, tedious... but maybe in certain situations it might be useful.

I mean yes, people with disabilities often have a unique contribution to offer and a unique perspective. They often excel at very specific things. However, implying that it is so advantageous to be disabled that we would all evolve to be that way is ridiculous. Thinking things through slowly step by step may reveal errors others have glossed over...But it's perfectly possible for someone without a severe disability to do that. Meanwhile, the person with minimal to no cerebellum is totally incapable of stepping up to the task when, like a lot of the time, speed and intuition is important. If I wasn't able to rely on context and intuition at all I wouldn't be able to do my job, or even day to day tasks, with enough efficiency to get anything done. Furthermore, someone without a cerebellum will also have to learn to not smash themselves in the face when they're trying to eat and have to deal with constant sensory processing issues. This is not advantageous. It's a disability. So it's not going to be picked up by natural selection.

The premise that needs to be scrutinized is whether what we are deeming a “disability” is actually that. Thinking in systems, a component’s calibration (whether it is able or not) to a system can change due to the system as a whole changing (political, economic, cultural pressure).

One example is how the change from hunter/gatherer to agricultural lifestyles may have rendered the strengths of the hunter’s brain a weakness in an agricultural society.

The issue is nobody is convincing me that being unable to use context and sensory input properly would be advantageous in our current society. Because it wouldn't. And that's the end of that.

Being unable to anticipate context could reduce the prevalence of stereotyping, for instance.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com