The Main Difference Between Hyperfocus and Ideological Fanaticism

 Hyperfocus is a characteristic more common in some conditions, such as autism and ADHD. Individuals with hyperfocus exhibit a strong and sustained interest in certain topics, often focusing on these interests for several hours a day or for an indefinite period of time. Hyperfocus can be even more profound if it manifests itself over a long period of time. Hyperfocus can also manifest as the cognitive and/or psychological structure of ideological fanaticism, usually when the obsessive focus turns to political or ideological issues. But not only because it focuses on these issues, because the most important element in determining ideological fanaticism is the existence of a firm inflexibility about one's own beliefs that transcends common sense. That is, the level of conviction is so high that it prevents the affected individual from constantly self-criticizing them, including their self-criticism, such as how fact-based, evidence-based, or analytically balanced they are.

A principal diferença entre hiperfoco e fanatismo ideológico

O hiperfoco é uma característica que é mais comum em algumas condições, como o autismo e o TDAH. Indivíduos com hiperfoco apresentam um interesse forte e constante sobre determinados tópicos, podendo ficar várias horas por dia concentrados nesses interesses ou por um tempo indeterminado, em que o hiperfoco pode ser ainda mais profundo ao se manifestar durante um longo período da vida. Pois o hiperfoco também pode se manifestar como a estrutura cognitiva e/ou psicológica de um fanatismo ideológico, geralmente quando o foco obsessivo se volta para temas políticos ou ideológicos. Mas não apenas por se direcionar para esses temas, porque o elemento mais importante para determinar o fanatismo ideológico é a existência de uma inflexibilidade convicta sobre as próprias crenças que perpassa o bom senso, isto é, em que o nível de convicção é tão alto que impede o indivíduo afetado de fazer uma autocrítica constante sobre elas e que também é sobre si mesmo, por exemplo, sobre o quão baseadas em fatos, evidências ou ponderação analítica elas estão.

The difference between dogma and factual and/or rational assertion

 It's not just or intrinsically a difference in flexibility of thought, but in how factual that thought is, because there are, of course, conclusive statements that express a fact or an objective truth. This is one way I've found to differentiate dogma from a conclusive statement that expresses a fact or an objective truth, since it doesn't seem sufficient to me to define dogma as synonymous with inflexibility, but rather to use a statement that is also fallacious or untrue, so as to highlight the irrational nature of insisting on what is not true—that is, of, in certain cases, being inflexible, even if there is nothing primarily wrong, in an intellectual sense, in making conclusive statements that express facts. Secondarily, in these cases, only the moral or ethical question can be raised.

A diferença entre dogma e afirmação factual e/ou racional

 Não é apenas ou intrinsecamente a diferença de flexibilidade de pensamento, mas do quão factual é esse pensamento, porque existem, evidentemente, afirmações conclusivas que expressam um fato ou uma verdade objetiva. Essa é uma maneira que encontrei de diferenciar dogma de uma afirmação conclusiva que expressa um fato ou uma verdade objetiva, já que não me parece suficiente determinar dogma como sinônimo de inflexibilidade, mas a partir de uma afirmação que também seja falaciosa ou inverídica, até para que seja ressaltado o caráter irracional do ato de teimar sobre o que não é verdadeiro, isto é, de, em certos casos, mostrar-se inflexível, se não há nada de primariamente errado, em um sentido intelectual, fazer afirmações conclusivas que expressam fatos. Secundariamente, nesses casos, apenas a questão moral ou ética que pode ser levantada. 

What also leads people to believe in the pseudoscience of the blank slate?

 Especially those with high cognitive abilities, beyond the very irrationality* of presenting this belief?

What I've mentioned before in other texts: a self-projection or extrapolation of one's own personal situation, situational context, onto others' perspectives*, but also of more intrinsic aspects, such as cognitive abilities, as if what "works" or "worked" for them were also perfectly teachable to others, or at least to the majority. Basically, a confusion of personal perspective with universal perspective, in which a more innate ability to grasp information, rules, and/or techniques, coupled with a deficiency in self-knowledge, related to a deficiency in rational thought, leads some or many people, especially those with this high-capacity profile, to believe that what happens to them can also happen to others, that everything is simply a matter of will, effort, or persistence, and of "education"...

* Which is also a structural aspect of irrationality.

Another factor that often generates this confusion is belonging to a higher social class, as it can give the false impression that the personal challenges, especially financial ones, of individuals belonging to lower social classes can be as easily manageable as those belonging to higher classes, that everything depends on the individual's will or ability, completely disregarding unfavorable contexts. Ultimately, reinforcing and replicating the fallacious narrative of economic neoliberalism, which asserts individual responsibility as the only relevant factor in an individual's situation, delegating to the social context, little or no importance.

O que também leva as pessoas a acreditarem na pseudociência da tábula rasa??

 Especialmente aquelas com altas capacidades cognitivas, além da própria irracionalidade* de apresentarem essa crença??

O que já falei antes em outros textos: uma autoprojeção ou extrapolação da própria situação pessoal, de contexto situacional, sobre perspectivas alheias*, mas também de aspectos mais intrínsecos, como as capacidades cognitivas, como se, o que ''funciona'' ou ''funcionou'' para elas, também fosse perfeitamente ensinável para os outros, ou pelo menos para uma maioria. Basicamente uma confusão de perspectiva pessoal com perspectiva universal, em que uma facilidade mais inata para apreender informações, regras e/ou técnicas, mais uma deficiência em autoconhecimento, relacionada com uma deficiência de pensamento racional, leva algumas ou muitas pessoas, especialmente aquelas com esse perfil de altas capacidades, a acreditarem que, o que acontece com elas, também pode acontecer com os outros, que tudo é apenas uma questão de vontade, esforço ou persistência, e de "educação"...

* O que não deixa de ser um aspecto estrutural da irracionalidade

Outro fator que costuma gerar essa confusão é o de pertencer a uma classe social mais alta, já que pode passar uma falsa impressão de que os desafios pessoais, especialmente os de natureza financeira, dos indivíduos que pertencem às classes sociais mais baixas, podem ser tão facilmente manejáveis quanto dos que pertencem às classes mais altas, que tudo depende da vontade ou capacidade do indivíduo, desprezando completamente contextos desfavoráveis, enfim, reforçando e replicando a narrativa falaciosa do neoliberalismo econômico, de afirmação de responsabilidade individual como único fator relevante para a situação de um indivíduo, delegando ao contexto social, pouca ou nenhuma importância. 

A hypothesis based on the correlations found between month or season of birth and psychological tendencies

 There are some interesting studies that have found positive, though relatively modest, correlations between the month or season of birth and certain psychological tendencies: those born in the winter, especially late winter and early spring, at least in the Northern Hemisphere, are at greater risk of developing mental disorders, especially schizophrenia. The most common explanation is that pregnant women who conceive during this period are more exposed to viral infections, and that, if infected, their children could experience long-term effects later in life, including mental disorders. Another possible factor is that cold weather induces a vitamin D deficiency, which could complicate the normal development of pregnancies. A correlation between prematurity (or low birth weight) and schizophrenia (and psychopathology in general) has also been noted. Perhaps normal brain development that is abruptly interrupted by external factors could also be a long-term trigger for the expression of a mental disorder. Or it may be that genetic, and therefore hereditary, factors explain a good portion of psychiatric disorders. First, a couple whose two partners have the same disorder are at greater risk of passing it on to their natural descendants than a couple with only one carrier, and especially if there is no explicit sign of mental disorder between a pair of humans biologically capable of procreating or who have already done so. It is precisely this last possibility that seems most likely to me, perhaps because it is the least extraordinary. First, because assortative relationships, in which there is a mutual and active interest in mating based on the perception of phenotypic similarities—usually a combination of biotype, personality, and social circumstances—increase the likelihood that individuals of opposite sexes with the same health risks, including psychiatric ones, will enter into a relationship that will result in natural offspring. Second, the proposed mechanism to explain the correlation between being born in winter (cold, in the Northern Hemisphere) and developing certain mental disorders requires empirical proof, and to my knowledge, I don't know if it exists in humans. Third, most individuals born in winter do not become schizophrenic, although it would be interesting to see if a higher proportion of individuals born in this period (especially in temperate climates) develop other psychiatric disorders, or at least a greater expression of associated personality and cognitive traits. Fourth, human individuals with different personality profiles (which are predominantly stable patterns of behavior) tend to exhibit different habits, likely also in mating. Even more directly related to this correlation between month or season of birth and psychological tendencies, one of the behavioral or personality differences that may explain it is climate preference. Those who prefer cold weather (or who don't exhibit this type of preference) feel more motivated during this time of year, even to have sex/procreate (or who don't exhibit any differences in motivation throughout the year), while the opposite pattern occurs for those who prefer warm weather. For example, more emotionally unstable individuals tend to feel more "depressed" or less motivated in cold weather, especially in environments with harsh winters, including for sexual intercourse. The opposite pattern occurs during the warmer months. And since human pregnancy lasts, on average, nine months, a pregnancy that began in summer or spring will complete its cycle in fall or winter. So perhaps the most important element in this situation is the influence of personality type, which expresses various biological aspects: hormonal, mental, genetic... and not necessarily the influence of the environment acting directly on the human organism, even if it influences it indirectly, through behavior.

Okay, but then how can we explain this pattern in tropical and equatorial climates, if these climates are characterized by less significant temperature variations?

Even if there is less temperature variation in these regions, the underlying factor is the same: there are differences in mental traits among human beings that result in differences in habits. In addition, these mental traits are not just abstractions, as they also express more organic and variably hereditary aspects of the body. So, even if this pattern isn't confirmed in all regions, its possible absence of correlative universality does not invalidate its evidence of specific correlation. But perhaps this correlation is nothing more than "genetic confounding," in which a correlation that suggests environmental causality for a given behavioral tendency actually has as its underlying, primary, and most influential factors: biological characteristics, such as personality traits, which are also transmitted from parents to children. And, before concluding this text, I wonder if the risk of premature birth (or even miscarriage) could also be an intrinsic and variably heritable predisposition, not just a completely random incident—that is, one that doesn't present the same probability of occurring in any pregnant woman. I know there are studies showing differences in this risk between ethnic or racial groups (during a quick search on this topic, I found studies showing that, in fact, there is indirect evidence of a genetic influence on this risk)...

Sources:

Season of birth in schizophrenia: a maternal-fetal chronobiological hypothesis

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21382670/;

https://www.uol.com.br/vivabem/noticias/redacao/2017/10/06/maioria-dos-casos-de-esquizofrenia-e-genetico.htm

Heritability of Schizophrenia and Schizophrenia Spectrum Based on the Nationwide Danish Twin Register

https://www.biologicalpsychiatryjournal.com/article/S0006-3223(17)31905-4/abstract;

Family history is a predictor of current preterm birth

https://www.ajogmfm.org/article/S2589-9333(20)30270-6/pdf;

The Role of Genetics in Preterm Birth

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43032-023-01287-9;

Levels of the stress hormone cortisol are higher in women who give birth in the autumn and winter than those who give birth in the spring or summer, finds a new study by researchers at Cardiff University.

https://www.cardiff.ac.uk/news/view/1547555-new-research-could-explain-why-babies-born-during-winter-are-at-higher-risk-of-developing-mental-health-disorders