>All evidence suggests that human characteristics (including characteristics of the brain) follow a normal distribution.
Yet you fail to cite a single piece of it... how odd.
Because it's so commonly accepted I thought you'd be able to perform even a simple google search. Besides, you are the one asserting the claim, so *you* provide the evidence.
Physical characteristics of the brain - sure, but the programming of the neural net, personality, implementation... hell no -
Sorry, wrong again - personality characteristics also follow a normal distribution. Mental characteristics follow a normal distribution. You are making the argument that one particular mental characteristic does not follow a normal distribution - please provide the numbers.
what you're claiming is prohibited by the laws of mathematics. Two brains can no more be identically programmed than four and four can make nine.
But the result of that programming - including gender identity - certainly *do* fall within a normal distribution. The transgender folk may be on the edges of the bell curve, but "normal" is well-defined as the middle bulk of that curve, hence there actually is a normal.
"Well, we don't really know how the brain works, so each brain must be unique"
That's a nice strawman you got there... shame if anything were to happen to it. Like me pointing out that my argument was we DO know how brains work
That's news to the science and medical world. You should start preparing for your nobel prize now.
- and things that work like that CAN ONLY BE UNIQUE and that this is a mathematical fact, and giving you an abundance of evidence from different fields that neural network programming must be unique.
>As a lifelong atheist I've laughed at "evidence" of god that goes "Well, if you can't explain it, then my explanation must be correct"
Wow two strawmen in a row. Let me hit you over the head again. I never said "it's true because we don't understand it" - I said "we don't know how it works BECAUSE no two works the same".
Wrong yet again. We do not understand how the brain works so we can only measure the output (rate of occurrence of certain characteristics). All measurements thus far taken show that human brains exhibit characteristics that fall into a normal distribution. There is no characteristic as yet measured that does not adhere to a fairly normal distribution.
It's not an argument FROM ignorance, the ignorance is the EFFECT not the cause. The cause is "it's a neural network and the programming of neural networks is an emergent phenomenon" - the EFFECT of that cause is "no two are ever the same".
But lets look beyond this silly argument for a moment - at the fact that even if you were CORRECT you'd still be a fucking idiot. Because it is utterly meaningless. Lets, for the sake of argument, accept your ridiculous notion of "normal". You've given absolutely NO evidence or even an argument why "normal" should equal "good" let alone "better".
I didn't say that normal is good or better. I said that your assertion of There is no normal is unscientific bullshit at worst, laughably comical at best.
Why is "normal" special. So we accept the idea of "normal" - it makes no difference. Not "normal" is not a bad thing, it isn't evil, it isn't lesser. It's just different. And different is not indicative of bad. And it sure as hell doesn't justify "lesser rights".
I never said nor implied that either. I said that normal, as both a scientific concept and a lay concept, exists as far as human brains are concerned. It's the middle majority of the bell curve.
I do not participate in such ridiculous notions - I admire exceptional people. I have no admiration for "normal" people. More than any single person, it was Turing who defeated Hitler - because he was in no sense normal. He had a rare (and not "normal") sexual orientation and a rare and not normal intellect. He was exceptional - and worthy of admiration. Normal is an insult.
Enough of your virtue signalling, make up your mind - is there or is there not a normal as far as the human brain goes? You've now in this thread asserted both that there is a normal and that there isn't a normal.