|Homepage||The Computer Inside You||
essays and commentary
|Prev||book’s homepage --|-- table of contents --|-- entire book in a single web page||Next|
My sister’s son (born 1980) has Tourette Syndrome. In December 2001, knowing of my interest in his condition, he sent me an email in which he gives “a general synopsis that I wrote that covers some of the subtleties about TS that I will use when it is necessary to educate those around me”:
What is Tourette Syndrome?
Tourette Syndrome (TS) is a nervous system disorder characterized by involuntary, rapid, sudden movements or vocalizations called tics that occur repeatedly in the same way. TS is not degenerative in any way; it is not a sign of mental illness; it is not caused by poor parenting or abuse of any kind. TS usually begins in childhood and often continues throughout life; it is found across all ethnic backgrounds and at all socioeconomic levels; although socially awkward its expression is largely cosmetic.
The expression of tics is unlimited and is unique to each person. The complexity of some tics sometimes makes it hard for others to believe the strange actions and inappropriate vocal utterances are not deliberate.
Examples are: facial grimaces, eye blinking; head jerking; shoulder shrugging; throat clearing; yelping noises; tongue clicking; snapping; touching other people or objects; self-injurious actions; copraxia (obscene gestures); coprolalia (obscene language); echolalia (repeating a sound or word just heard); mimicking someone’s mannerisms.
Tics occur many times a day usually in bouts waxing and waning in their severity and periodically changing in frequency, type and location.
Complex verbal tics are often triggered by a completely unrelated thought and do not represent what the person is thinking about.
Tics are suggestible. Merely the mention or sight of a specific tic may induce it.
Repressing tics is difficult and only increases the tension making the tics come out worse later.
Most of the time in situations where it would be socially inappropriate for certain tics the person with TS will not have any tics or ones that are not disturbing, but as soon as they move to a less restricted environment they will often experience a major tic bout.
When someone is told to stop ticcing or if they are in a place where they know they can’t tic they will sometimes feel the compulsion even more strongly.
Stress, positive or negative emotional excitement, fatigue, Central Nervous System stimulants, unpleasant memories or lack of understanding from others can all significantly increase tics.
Being in a stimulating or new environment, involved in conversation, meeting new people, concentrating on a task, relaxation, and acceptance by others can all significantly decrease tics.
What I Ask of You
Now that I understand what TS is, I accept it and it’s not a big deal to me. Most of the time I will be fine, but sometimes it can be overwhelming so when I do tic please ignore them as they are harmless. However if I offend you or you can’t handle seeing me this way then talk directly to me about it and I will try to accommodate you by redirecting the tic into something less threatening to your sensibilities, but note that I will not ostracize myself because of this. If you have any other concerns or questions please ask me.
His above synopsis is drawn from his study of the TS literature, and from his own experience with TS. During a two-week visit by my nephew in July 2001, I had the chance to observe his TS characteristics: he has both movement tics and vocal tics, including both copraxia and coprolalia. Near the end of his visit I developed an explanation for Tourette Syndrome that I believe is correct:
Briefly, my explanation for Tourette Syndrome is that for a person with TS, a part of the mind that for an average person of that nation and gender outputs to n input channels of the awareness particle (the soliton), has instead substantially fewer input channels of the awareness particle to which it can output, because those input channels, at some stage during that person’s previous development, were, in effect, allocated to one or more other mind parts. Then, over time, that mind part that is missing its normal allocation of awareness-particle input channels, compensates, proportionate to its loss, by sending its outputs elsewhere, ultimately resulting in the tics of TS.,
In terms of tics, TS cases range from mild to severe. For example, a person who just does a lot of eye blinking or throat clearing would be a mild case; my nephew, with his copraxia and coprolalia, is a severe case. As far as what determines TS severity, the primary determinant is probably the mind part involved and the extent to which that mind part has lost its normal allocation of awareness-particle input channels: the fewer the number of lost channels, the more mild the TS; the greater the number of lost channels, the more severe the TS.
In theory, the mind part that suffered the loss may be different in different TS cases. However, in at least many TS cases, and, I believe, in the case of my nephew, the specific mind part that suffered the loss is that mind part—here called the sexual mind part—that is heavily involved in sexual feeling, desire, and attraction. The primary reason to believe this is because TS tics, in a typical severe case, often have a strong sexual content. In addition, another reason is the similarity between the strong insistence of TS tics and the strong insistence of sexual desire.
One may assume that each soliton has the same total number of input channels, and that each input channel is identical in terms of its data-carrying characteristics. Given the central governing role that the soliton plays vis-a-vis the other intelligent particles that collectively form the mind, it stands to reason that a soliton’s input and output channels are not wasted: they are all utilized. Thus, if some mind part does not have its normal allocation of awareness-particle input channels, then those awareness-particle input channels have been allocated elsewhere. Regarding Tourette Syndrome, it is interesting to note that the TS group as a whole has a reputation for being intelligent. For example, there are many statements like the following on the internet:
Many of my patients with Tourette syndrome are of above average intelligence, frequently intellectually gifted.
… most people with TS appear to have above average intelligence.
Many people believe there is a link between intelligence, creativity, and Tourette syndrome. Certainly in my experience, children with Tourette’s are often quite intelligent …
Given that general intelligence seems to be inherited from the mother, I expected my nephew to have an intelligence similar to my own, since we are both on the same female tree (his mother’s mother is also my mother). However, what I have noticed about my nephew is that in some intellectual areas we are about the same, but in other intellectual areas he either clearly exceeds me (example: writing ability) or far exceeds me (example: mathematical ability). Thus, regarding my nephew, he fits the pattern of having TS and being intelligent; in his case, very intelligent.
Given the association of Tourette Syndrome with intelligence, it seems safe to assume that for a typical person with TS, the mind parts that, in effect, account for intelligence, have received more than their normal share of awareness-particle input channels. Thus, in effect, the loss of the sexual mind part has been the gain of the intellectual mind parts. In general, the greater the loss for the sexual mind part, the greater the enhancement of intelligence. The extent of the loss for the sexual mind part, and its consequent effects, varies from one TS person to the next. In the case of my nephew, his loss appears to have been sufficiently great enough to cause, among other things, a complete absence of orgasm. Here is a dictionary definition of orgasm:
orgasm: The climax of sexual excitement, marked normally by ejaculation of semen by the male and by the release of tumescence in erectile organs of both sexes.
This dictionary definition describes the physical events that coincide with the orgasm experience, which for a male is the ejaculation of semen. Its description of the orgasm feeling is limited to a statement about the feeling’s relative strength and its placement on the pleasure-pain scale (climax of sexual excitement: presumably the most pleasurable). In general, describing a feeling is limited to stating such things as the feeling’s strength or intensity; its duration; its placement on a scale that ranges from pleasure to pain; its comparison to other feelings. As a rule, reading a written description of a feeling does not cause one to experience that feeling, because the data sent to the awareness particle for reading comprehension is different than the data sent to the awareness particle for causing that feeling. Likewise, the act of remembering a feeling does not cause one to experience that feeling, because the data sent to the awareness particle for remembering is different than the data sent to the awareness particle for causing that feeling.
Drawing on my own experience with male orgasm: it came in waves, with each wave coinciding with each ejaculation of semen; it was a feeling that was strong but not overwhelmingly so, at least for me; it definitely felt good; nothing else in my life has felt like an orgasm. Note that for a typical male in his physical prime (younger than middle-aged), from the first ejaculation to the last, typically less than ten seconds elapse, so the accumulated duration of the orgasm feeling is even less than this.
In November 2000, my nephew, during a phone call, surprised me by asking about my orgasm experience. As I then learned, he has never had an orgasm during ejaculation (nor at any other time), and he was asking me about my own experience, because he was trying to find out if he had inherited his no-orgasm condition from his relatives. His no-orgasm condition is a rarity for young males. However, the loss of orgasm by older males is more common, as I was to find out for myself, a mere six months later, in May 2001: at age 45½, over a period of about a month, my orgasm experience, being noticeably weaker each successive time, faded away to nothing; and yet, everything else, including the ejaculation, was the same—it was just the orgasm feeling itself that had disappeared.
My orgasm loss, I assume, was a consequence of my advancing age. The male-orgasm experience is obviously a reward, whose ultimate purpose is the production of children. As a male ages, his value as a potential new father declines for many reasons. Thus, the withdrawal of the orgasm reward is understandable.
At the time of my orgasm loss, I was not expecting something positive to result in consequence; but that is what happened. About three months later, in August 2001, while replaying a computer game, I noticed that the game seemed much easier for me (beyond what I had experienced before when replaying computer games). Then I replayed two other computer games, and, among other things, I noticed that I was playing in a way that I had never played before with any such game: I was actually planning my movements, and, for the first time, I was able to shoot accurately while moving; I also found myself thinking about movement strategies at other times of the day when I was not playing. Overall, I was much more focused on, and interested in, how I moved during combat encounters, than I had been in the past. My combat strategy in the past consisted of little more than trying to find the best spot to be in at the beginning of the encounter, and then just standing still, firing the best weapon I had at the targets; complex movement sequences during combat were simply beyond me: I did not think about them, and I did not make them. Regarding my past game play, I have known about my weak game play since the early 1980s, based on my experience with coin-operated video games. In recent years, playing 3D first-person-shooter games on my computer, I would choose the easiest game-difficulty settings out of necessity, and I would also use cheats as needed, such as god-mode (invulnerability), to get thru game sections that I could not otherwise get thru. Now, however, with my newfound movement abilities, I play typical shooter games on normal difficulty, and I get thru them without cheats, so I appear to now be about average, compared to other males who play these computer games.
Regarding my loss of orgasm, the following explanation seems likely: My sexual mind part had a substantial number of awareness-particle input channels that were dedicated to carrying the data that causes the orgasm feeling. With my advancing age, my sexual mind part gave up these input channels, which were then acquired by a different mind part that up until that time had a below-normal allocation of awareness-particle input channels (as demonstrated by my weak game play compared to other males).
Regarding how my orgasm faded away over a period of about a month, being progressively weaker each time, the following explanation seems likely: The strength of the orgasm feeling—and of feelings in general—is proportional to the number of awareness-particle input channels carrying the data that causes that feeling., My progressively weaker orgasm was caused by having progressively fewer awareness-particle input channels carrying the data that causes the orgasm feeling.
Overall, the allocation of the awareness-particle input channels among the different mind parts is a major determinant in how one differs from other people. Thus, for example, differences in intelligence between two persons, in the typical case, is primarily due to different allocations of the awareness-particle input channels. Also, how the awareness-particle input channels are allocated among the different mind parts is a major determinant in how the two genders, men and women, differ from each other; and how the three races of mankind differ from each other; and how the various nations of mankind differ from each other.,,, For example, the average woman has a weaker orgasm experience than the average man. Thus, the allocation plan for the average woman allocates fewer awareness-particle input channels to orgasm, than does the allocation plan for the average man.
 Based on the size of our visual field, and assuming each pixel in our visual field uses one awareness-particle input channel, the total number of input channels that the awareness particle has is in the millions. Thus, the value of n could easily be in the thousands.
 That a mind part can establish new connections for its outputs and/or inputs when its normal connections are lost is demonstrated by the fact that many people who suffer serious brain damage—as a consequence of such things as head wounds, strokes, and brain tumors—and initially lose one or more of their mental abilities, are able to regain some or all of their lost mental abilities in the following months or years as the affected mind parts learn to make use of different neural pathways to carry the affected input and/or output data.
That a mind part can establish new connections when its normal connections are lost is also demonstrated by the phenomenon of phantom limbs. Developing a phantom limb is a typical result for someone who has had a limb amputated. In the case of a limb amputation, there is no brain damage. Instead, because of the amputation, the normal neural pathways that used to carry the signals from that limb have fallen silent. The affected mind part then compensates—regaining sensory input for that limb—by remapping the lost limb onto an adjoining area of primary motor cortex, and interpreting the sensory input from that adjoining cortex area as sensory input from the amputated limb. For example:
… touching the stump of an amputated arm often causes two sensations: one is the normal sensation you expect from touching skin; the second is … a feeling that the phantom hand is also being touched. [Hoffman, op. cit., p. 173]
V.Q. was seventeen when his left arm was amputated six centimeters above the elbow. Four weeks later he was tested by Ramachandran and colleagues, who found a systematic map of his phantom hand on his left arm, about seven centimeters above the stump. They also found a map of the phantom hand on his face, on the lower left side … [Ibid., p. 175. Hoffman also describes another amputee with a similar amputation, who likewise had a map for his phantom hand on both his face and on his arm above the stump. And, as Hoffman notes, the cortex area for the hand, adjoins the cortex area for the rest of that arm, and also adjoins on the opposite side the cortex area for the face.]
 This explanation for Tourette Syndrome—that a mind part that is missing its normal allocation of awareness-particle input channels, compensates, proportionate to its loss, by sending its outputs elsewhere—offers a similar explanation for the condition known as tardive dyskinesia. Here is a brief description of tardive dyskinesia:
Tardive dyskinesia is a neurological syndrome caused by the long-term use of neuroleptic drugs. Neuroleptic drugs are generally prescribed for psychiatric disorders, as well as for some gastrointestinal and neurological disorders. Tardive dyskinesia is characterized by repetitive, involuntary, purposeless movements. Features of the disorder may include grimacing, tongue protrusion, lip smacking, puckering and pursing, and rapid eye blinking. Rapid movements of the arms, legs, and trunk may also occur. Impaired movements of the fingers may appear as though the patient is playing an invisible guitar or piano.
There is no standard treatment for tardive dyskinesia. Treatment is highly individualized. The first step is generally to stop or minimize the use of the neuroleptic drug. …
Symptoms of tardive dyskinesia may remain long after discontinuation of neuroleptic drugs; however, with careful management, some symptoms may improve and/or disappear with time. [Tardive Dyskinesia Information Page, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, at: http://www.ninds.nih.gov/health_and_medical/disorders/tardive_doc.htm]
Neuroleptic drugs interfere with normal brain chemistry and can block neuron signal transmission in one or more brain areas. If some mind part has the neural pathways that it normally uses for its outputs blocked for a long time, then that mind part is going to try to compensate, proportionate to its loss, by sending its outputs elsewhere, which may ultimately result in the movement tics of tardive dyskinesia.
 For example, a man with severe TS, commenting about his spoken vocal tics, asks: “Why is it always sexual?” (from the one-hour TV program Tourette’s Syndrome: Uncensored, BBC, 2000).
In the case of my nephew, his spoken vocal tics were often sexual in content, but not exclusively so. One way to explain this is that he may have besides the sexual mind part reacting to channel loss, an additional non-sexual mind part also reacting to channel loss. In other words, some TS cases may be caused by multiple mind parts that have each suffered substantial channel loss. Alternatively, a different way to explain the variety in my nephew’s spoken vocal tics is to suggest that the sexual mind part—which cannot by itself understand what a given spoken phrase means (language understanding is accomplished by a different mind part)—selects the verbal phrases it will output based on data from other mind parts; and this selection criteria—whatever it is—sometimes results in non-sexual phrases being selected, because they have the same signature as sexual phrases.
 For example, as my nephew says in his TS synopsis:
To make the similarity to sexual desire clear, here is my rewritten version of his points (I am assuming a typical young man):
 At: http://www.doctorjudith.com/disorder_info.htm
 At: http://www.tourettesyndrome.co.uk/information.htm
 At: http://www.bestdoctors.com/en/askadoctor/b/brown/lwbrown_061200_q9.htm
 Webster’s II New Riverside University Dictionary. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1984.
 Unfortunately for me, I was circumcised as an infant, as were roughly 70% of the other American males born in 1955. This book is not about America nor about circumcision (on these two subjects see my other writings, such as my essays American Culture and The Psychological Harm of Male Circumcision). However, I am mentioning this fact about my being circumcised because my study of the circumcision subject has made me aware of the fact that circumcision—in addition to its many other negative sexual effects—tends to suppress and lessen the orgasm experience. For example, the results of a poll titled Cut vs Intact vs Restored/Restoring, created in December 2002 by razniq, shows the harm that circumcision does to the orgasm experience (the poll is at http://www.misterpoll.com/poll.mpl?id=803956922; the poll results are at http://www.misterpoll.com/results.mpl?id=803956922; the bracketed [notes] are mine, added for clarity):
Describe what you feel when you come [orgasm].
- I’m cut [circumcised] and I feel barely anything. (6%)
- I’m cut [circumcised] and I feel something in my ‘equipment’ [genitals] only. (13%)
- I’m cut [circumcised] and I feel it in my whole body. (24%)
- I’m intact [natural; not circumcised] and I feel barely anything. (0%)
- I’m intact [natural; not circumcised] and I feel something in my ‘equipment’ [genitals] only. (1%)
- I’m intact [natural; not circumcised] and I feel it in my whole body. (21%)
- I am restoring/restored and what I feel has improved. (24%)
- I am restoring/restored and there is no change in what I feel. (2%)
- I am restoring/restored and what I feel has decreased. (0%)
- I am a USA female. (2%)
- I am a non-USA female. (2%)
353 total votes
[For each person taking the poll, choosing from the above eleven choices, the poll allows only a single answer. But note that the total of the above percentages adds up to 95% instead of 100%, presumably because the poll results are rounded down to the nearest integer.]
[Note that I saw a post by razniq in an anti-circumcision forum that I like to read, telling about his poll; I assume the high percentage for “restoring/restored” (totals 26%) is a direct consequence of the places where razniq advertised his poll, because men who have done foreskin restoration tend to congregate in foreskin-restoration and anti-circumcision forums.]
The above poll results make clear the negative effect that circumcision has on the orgasm experience. As the poll results show, circumcision can steal from its victim the experience of a full-body orgasm. Additional evidence for this conclusion is the fact that some men who have restored their foreskins (only a partial restoration is possible) report making the transition from a localized orgasm to a full-body orgasm. For example, a foreskin-restoration forum post by zac0212, dated April 15, 2003, says:
I would describe my circumcision as loose with a partial frenulum (damaged during circ). I have been restoring for a little over a month. Before restoring my orgasms were very localized. In the short time that I have been restoring, my orgasms have changed significantly. My inner foreskin remnant and frenulum have become much more sensitive. I am amazed at how much more I can experience during sex, and my orgasms take over my whole body. Amazing![At: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/ForeskinRestoration/message/3232]
As for myself, exactly what is meant by a full-body orgasm I do not know, because I never had one; I only had the localized kind. Thus, my orgasm description is that of a circumcised man who has never had a full-body orgasm.
 Having dedicated channels to carry the data for a specific feeling means that there are no channel-sharing conflicts and no need for arbitration, which would otherwise be the case if a given channel were used to carry other data besides the data that produces that feeling.
In the case of orgasm, those channels allocated to carry the orgasm-producing data will be unused most of the time. If one were to assume that all awareness-particle input channels are more or less dedicated, then the channels allocated to carry the orgasm-producing data are probably among the least used channels. As an example of high utilization, consider the channels dedicated to vision.
 The reason that the strength of a feeling would be proportional to the number of awareness-particle input channels carrying the data that causes that feeling, is because this is a simple and reliable arbitration method for the awareness particle: in effect, the strength of a feeling is proportional to the number of votes for that feeling, with each input channel counting as one vote. The alternative, having the strength of a feeling encoded as part of the input data for that feeling, would be dangerous, as it would mean that a single input channel would have the capability to deliver a very strong feeling.
 Note that the orgasm feeling differs from most other feelings in that the orgasm feeling—based on my own experience before my loss, and based on how others describe it—has much less variation in its perceived intensity range. Each orgasm feels the same as the previous orgasm. Given this sameness, this means that when the orgasm feeling is sent to the awareness, of those awareness-particle input channels allocated (dedicated) for carrying the data that causes the orgasm feeling, the same or nearly the same fraction of those allocated awareness-particle input channels are utilized for carrying the orgasm-producing data to the awareness. Assuming the orgasm feeling is not suppressed by some external cause such as circumcision, the typical orgasm feeling probably utilizes all or nearly all of the total allocation for carrying the data that causes the orgasm feeling.
For most other feelings, including emotional feelings and also the feeling of physical pain, the mind part that sends that feeling to the awareness typically utilizes only a fraction of the total allocation for carrying the data that causes that feeling, with the size of that fraction depending on the wanted intensity of that feeling.
 Given that general intelligence seems to be inherited from the mother, it follows that this inheritance, at least in part, is in the form of an allocation plan, that allocates the awareness-particle input channels to the intellectual mind parts.
 This explanation for human mental differences, that they result primarily from differences in how the awareness-particle input channels have been allocated, means that humanity as a whole can share the same underlying programming of the mind parts. This greatly lessens the burden placed on the learned-program mechanism and its associated sharing mechanism (section 3.6), because there is no need to suggest that there are many substantially different versions of human mental programming, and likewise there is no need to suggest that human mental differences result from localized evolution of an individual’s mental programming over a short time frame.
One implication of this explanation for human mental differences is that the limiting factor for consciously expressed intelligence is the limited number of awareness-particle input channels, which is insufficient to fully connect all the various mind parts so that each mind part is connected to its maximum potential, assuming that a mind part’s maximum potential is represented by the extent to which the most capable people have the mental abilities associated with that mind part. Thus, if there were no limit on the number of awareness-particle input channels, each person could have the math ability of a great mathematician such as Newton, the writing ability of a great writer such as Dickens, the inventiveness of a great inventor such as Edison, the graphic-arts ability of a great artist such as Michelangelo, and so on (note: feel free to replace the names of Newton, Dickens, Edison, and Michelangelo with the names of those you recognize or revere as the most capable in those areas).
 The explanation that we all share the same underlying mental programming but the limiting factor for its conscious expression is the limited number of awareness-particle input channels, explains the commonly observed truism that excelling (compared to the average) in one or more ways is accompanied by deficits (compared to the average) elsewhere. For example, when I was a teenager in high-school, it was a commonplace truism that the jocks (athletes) were stupid, and the smart kids were unathletic. Well, it was true about myself and most of my friends (smart and unathletic), but there was an exception in that one of my friends was smart and also very athletic, which only means that his deficits were elsewhere. In effect, the allocation of awareness-particle input channels is what is known as a zero-sum game, where the gain of one player is a loss by the same amount for the other players. The players are the various mental programs (mind parts) that have outputs intended for connection to the awareness particle. Each of these mental programs is a potential recipient of an allocation of awareness-particle input channels, and this allocation defines the extent to which the mental program can connect its awareness-intended outputs to the awareness particle.
There are many players in this allocation game (I estimate more than 50 players), and the number of channels to be allocated is large (at least several million), so there is a very large number of different allocation plans for humanity that are sufficiently different enough from each other that an outside observer would be able to see differences between people having these different allocation plans.
About the truism that excelling in one or more ways is accompanied by deficits elsewhere, I have long been aware of many of my own various deficits (compared to the average). My sensory and motor deficits include: a weak sense of smell; a below-average sense of taste; low athletic ability. My intellectual deficits include: no artistic ability and a below-average memory for many of the things that the average person remembers, such as remembering details of one’s own life; I also have a poor sense of direction. My emotional deficits, as far as I know, are somewhat typical for a man (men on average have a more limited range of emotions than women).
For most people, their allocation plan, regarding how it allocates to the various intellectual abilities, spreads the wealth, so to speak, and is not so one-sided that one intellectual ability is far above average while most of the other intellectual abilities are far below average, which appears to be the case for those persons known as idiot savants. Psychologist David Gershaw gives an overview regarding idiot savants:
Leslie Lemke—born mentally retarded, blind, and suffering from cerebral palsy—sat down at the piano for the first time and played an almost perfect rendition of Tchaikovsky’s First Piano Concerto!
Bob, now in his sixties is a “calendar calculator”—he can name the day of the week for any given date since 1947. He gives most of his answers in less than 8 seconds! Yet Bob is mentally retarded. He lives in a foster home, because he cannot even manage simple daily living skills.
Although these people would perform below normal on any conventional measure of intelligence, they have fantastic abilities in very limited areas. In the past, psychologists have referred to such people as idiot savants—a term that literally means “learned idiots.”
However, this term is not really correct. First, although they are mentally retarded, they are not idiots—those at the lowest level of intelligence. Also they are not savants—people with great knowledge. Their amazing talents—most often in the areas of music, art, mathematics, calendar calculation or memory for obscure facts—are in sharp contrast to their low levels of general functioning. Psychologists estimate that less than one percent of mentally retarded people have some sort of “savant” talents.
In addition, an estimated 10% of autistic people have these “savant” abilities. Autism is a disorder that affects communication, learning and emotions—and sometimes includes mental retardation. Autistic people shun human relationships but may become completely absorbed with mechanical objects. [Gershaw, David. Islands of Genius, 1988. At: http://www.members.cox.net/dagershaw/lol/GeniusIsland.html]
In the case of idiot savants, besides having a severely unbalanced and one-sided allocation, it may also be the case that the total number of awareness-particle input channels that are allocated to the various intellectual abilities is substantially below average. In the case of a mentally retarded person who has no savant ability, his allocation plan is more balanced, but for whatever reason his allocation plan simply allocates too few awareness-particle input channels to the various intellectual abilities.
Autism, mentioned in the above quote, is another condition that is understandable in terms of being the result of an allocation plan that allocates a substantially below-average number of awareness-particle input channels to those mental programs involved in providing what the condition is deficient in. According to the Autism Society of America:
Autism is a complex developmental disability that typically appears during the first three years of life. … Children and adults with autism typically have difficulties in verbal and non-verbal communication, social interactions, and leisure or play activities.
The overall incidence of autism is consistent around the globe, but is four times more prevalent in boys than girls. Autism knows no racial, ethnic, or social boundaries, and family income, lifestyle, and educational levels do not affect the chance of autism’s occurrence. [What is Autism?. At: http://www.autism-society.org/site/PageServer?pagename=whatisautism]
About the much greater incidence of autism in males, there is a simple explanation: Women are known to be on average much more social and communicative than men. Thus, the allocation plan for the average female allocates many more awareness-particle input channels to those mental programs involved in socializing and communicating, than does the allocation plan for the average male. Thus, more males than females will have autism. More specifically, if one were to see the distribution curve (it is probably a bell curve) plotting for the entire female population the distribution of the number of awareness-particle input channels allocated to the mental programs involved in socializing and communicating, and compare this distribution curve with the same distribution curve for the entire male population, then, given that autism is “four times more prevalent in boys than girls,” this mean that the area under the male distribution curve between point 0 (no awareness-particle input channels allocated to the mental programs involved in socializing and communicating) and point x (the maximum allocation—to the mental programs involved in socializing and communicating—that is still likely to result in a diagnosis of autism; likely means at least 50% probability) is four times the area under the female distribution curve between those same two points (0 and x).
 In section 9.2 it was mentioned that the Caretakers apparently have the same two genders as mankind. Given this current section, one can outline the evolutionary process that would over time result in the Caretakers having two genders. This same evolutionary process also explains the two human genders (supplementing and in addition to the organic reason involving sexual reproduction):
Assume that at some point in their evolutionary development the Caretakers reached the same situation that currently applies to mankind, in which the limiting factor for their consciously expressed self (including their senses, feelings and emotions, personality, and intelligence) is the limited number of awareness-particle input channels, which is insufficient to fully connect all the various mind parts so that each mind part is connected to its maximum potential. In this situation, each newly formed Caretaker—assuming they undergo a rebirth process, albeit without a physical body—is faced with a winner-take-all choice, because, as a rule, the allocation of awareness-particle input channels, once done, does not change, except for certain age-related changes such as the age-related orgasm loss in my own case, and the other changes that happen at different stages in one’s growth to adulthood and one’s decline into old age (see the discussion in the next section about how the allocation plan changes for humans at different stages in their development as they grow and age).
As sociologists have already noted, it is known in human society that a winner-take-all election scheme eventually results in only two major political parties that capture most of the votes. Similarly, one may assume that the evolving Caretaker society would eventually have only two major allocation plans for allocating the awareness-particle input channels—resulting in their two genders, which are apparently similar to our own two genders. Each newly formed Caretaker, in effect, typically chooses one of these two major allocation plans (presumably this choice is made unconsciously), and then makes adjustments to that allocation plan as wanted and/or needed according to whatever influences are involved (presumably these adjustments are also made unconsciously).
 Of these three subdivisions of mankind—gender, race, and nation—nation is the smallest subdivision. In effect, each nation has two different allocation plans that each allocate the awareness-particle input channels. One of these allocation plans defines what an average man of that nation is like (in terms of mental qualities), and the other allocation plan defines what an average woman of that nation is like (in terms of mental qualities).
 Given the gender basis of the three races (section 9.2), one may infer that the african race has the strongest orgasm, the oriental race has the weakest orgasm, and the caucasian race is inbetween.