They just can't help it

Simon Baron-Cohen is the director of the Autism Research Centre, Cambridge University. He has a theory:

Are there essential differences between the male and female brain? My theory is that the female brain is predominantly hard-wired for empathy, and that the male brain is predominantly hard-wired for understanding and building systems. I call it the empathising-systemising (E-S) theory.

Empathising is the drive to identify another person's emotions and thoughts, and to respond to these with an appropriate emotion. The empathiser intuitively figures out how people are feeling, and how to treat people with care and sensitivity. Systemising is the drive to analyse and explore a system, to extract underlying rules that govern the behaviour of a system; and the drive to construct systems. The systemiser intuitively figures out how things work, or what the underlying rules are controlling a system. Systems can be as varied as a pond, a vehicle, a computer, a maths equation, or even an army unit. They all operate on inputs and deliver outputs, using rules.

According to this theory, a person (whether male or female) has a particular "brain type". There are three common brain types: for some individuals, empathising is stronger than systemising. This is called the female brain, or a brain of type E. For other individuals, systemising is stronger than empathising. This is called the male brain, or a brain of type S. Yet other individuals are equally strong in their systemising and empathising. This is called the "balanced brain", or a brain of type B. There are now tests you can take to see which type (E, S, or B) you are. Not which type you'd like to be, but which you actually are.

A key feature of this theory is that your sex cannot tell you which type of brain you have. Not all men have the male brain, and not all women have the female brain. The central claim of this new theory is only that on average, more males than females have a brain of type S, and more females than males have a brain of type E. http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/...ighereducation

Baron-Cohen acknowledges some concerns about his theory:

Should a theory like this be a cause of concern? Some people may worry that this is suggesting one sex is better than the other, but a moment's reflection should allay this fear. The theory is saying that, on average, males and females differ in what they are drawn to and what they find easy, but that both sexes have their strengths and their weaknesses. Neither sex is superior overall.

Others may worry that a theory like this stereotypes the sexes. But we need to distinguish stereotyping from the study of sex differences. The study simply looks at males and females as two groups, and asks why on average, differences are seen. There is no harm in that, and even some important scientific advances that can come out of it. Stereotyping, on the other hand, is when a characteristic of a group is assumed to apply to an individual, and this is potentially discriminating and harmful. The E-S theory does not stereotype. Rather, it seeks to explain why individuals are typical or atypical for their sex.

Baron-Cohen attempts to use his theory to explain Autism spectrum conditions:

Is there an explanation for autism?

I argue that people with autism may have an extreme of the male brain - good at systemising, very bad at empathising - and that studying autism with E-S theory in mind, can help increase our understanding of the condition.

Two largest sub-groups of autism are classic autism, and Asperger syndrome. Both share certain features: a difficulty in developing social relationships; a difficulty in communication; the presence of unusually strong, narrow interests; and a strong adherence to routines.

They differ in that in classic autism, the person might have an IQ at any point on the scale (even in the learning disabled range) and the person invariably had a language delay as a toddler. In Asperger syndrome, the person is always at least average in IQ (and may be well above average), and talked on time as a toddler. Autism spectrum conditions affect about one child in every 200, with males being far more likely than to be diagnosed.

What's interesting is that the obsessional interests that people with autism spectrum conditions show often focus on a system. It may be an intense preoccupation with light switches in the house, or running water from the taps in different sinks in the house. For their long-suffering parents, these "obsessions" can be very hard to cope.

So, how male or female is your brain? Simon Baron-Cohen has developed an empathy quotient test: http://www.genderdynamix.co.za/compo...thy/Itemid,206 and a systemizing quotient test: http://www.genderdynamix.co.za/compo...ing/Itemid,206 Were you surprised with the results?

In a recent article entitled, Why a lack of empathy is the root of all evil, Baron-Cohen argues, "From casual violence to genocide, acts of cruelty can be traced back to how the perpetrator identifies with other people ..." and gives this example:

Lucy Adeniji – an evangelical Christian and author of two books on childcare – trafficked two girls and a 21-year-old woman from Nigeria to work as slaves in her east London home. She made them toil for 21 hours a day and tortured them if they displeased her. The youngest girl was 11 years old.

Sentencing her to 11-and-a-half years in prison last month, Judge Simon Oliver said: "You are an evil woman. I have no doubt you have ruined these two girls' lives. They will suffer from the consequences of the behaviour you meted out to them for the rest of their lives."

Most people would probably agree with Judge Oliver's description of Adeniji as evil, but Simon Baron-Cohen, professor of developmental psychopathology at the University of Cambridge, would not be one of them. In his latest book, Zero Degrees of Empathy: A new theory of human cruelty, Baron-Cohen, argues that the term evil is unscientific and unhelpful. "Sometimes the term evil is used as a way to stop an inquiry," Baron-Cohen tells me. "'This person did it because they're evil' – as if that were an explanation." http://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...l-2262371.html

Baron-Cohen goes on to explain his thesis. There also is some push back that provides a bit of balance. I found it interesting Baron-Cohan has a woman doing the deeds.

I have placed a trigger icon because of the reference to "evil" that previously was intensely discussed. Baron-Cohen's thesis is interesting to me since I also recently came across an article that again correlates testosterone with aggression and risk-taking. http://blogs.psychcentral.com/healin...gender-divide/

Theories about human behavior abound. I some times wonder if we are gaining on our understanding.

23/35... Yup, I'm Aspi

this is quite interesting byz. i've got to research more what my scores indicate. 55 on first test, 23 on 2nd test. oh dear i hope i fall into some type of norm. anybody's input would help. what brain is mine? now i am confused.

That is interesting. I think this gives a little more explanation to the recent study showing that people in the sciences are higher up on the autism scale. Being in the sciences requires more of a systematic way of thinking rather than empathy. Just as social and human sciences or the arts is the opposite. And people in those areas are typically less likely to be as high up on the autism scale as people in analytical sciences - i.e. math, chemistry, biology.

This may be some sort of explanation for why there are more men in the sciences rather than women - and vise versa for the empathetic areas.

However, I think this is kind of common knowledge that women and men are wired differently. The fact that it could be linked to autism though, is a cool theory.

madisgram it suggests you have a pretty strongly female wired brain... If I understand it correctly.

It is an interesting way to look at autism.

It can also explain why women and men are constantly arguing " Emotionality verses systemizing " Ahhhh I can hear those words "You just don't get it" coming from a man and a woman having a debate. LOL

It is a good way to understand our differences and maximize on a joint overall capacity for achievement. And we can even see it in nature if we look at the different roles male and females have in reproduction and raising offspring.

I am also wondering about how these differences effect other disorders or personal issues as well. Perhaps treatments for depression, PTSD, and other issues that plague us need to be treated based on these E, S, or B type personalities. For example if a woman goes to a male psychologist and they are two different types it may not work as well in the therapy process. And that could be significant and should be examined further.

There is much here to ponder.

Open Eyes

Theodora, look at the graph at the end of the tests. 57/57 looks like it would fall along the border of either a balanced brain of a slightly systematic brain.

Kewl, I'm balanced! 63/37

Your Empathy Quotient is 25
Your Systemizing Quotient is 36.

That would make me aspie, I think... which makes sense. I was diagnosed autistic as a young child.

Well, I got a EQ of 44 and a SQ of 37 So from what I see it looks like I am balanced with a slight strength in the SQ. I wonder what I would have scored before I tumbled into PTSD because I am not as motivated/driven as I used to be. Hmmm

And some questions I didn't feel one way or the other, I was more neutral so the EQ may not be exact.

Open Eyes

Empathy: 55
Systemizing: 36

Balanced

Thanks for the links.

Glenn Rowe has a brief bit about Baron-Cohen and adds links to Baron-Cohen's Autism Spectrum quotient test and Mind in the eyes test

Rowe also adds some general information links to Asperger Syndrome and Autism.

http://glennrowe.net/BaronCohen.aspx

Empathy Quotient: 23
Systemizing Quotient: 45

Looking at the chart this puts me in the Extreme Type S in the lower right section of the grid. Earlier I Took the AQ test also which I scored a 35 on.

I am very likely an Aspie as the Aspie quiz said too.