I gave my spiel about the verbal/visuospatial or right-brain/left-brain divide here. Via Mind Hacks I found an Edge article by Chris Badcock titled The Imprinted Brain Theory. He views autism and schizophrenia as flip-sides of the “mentalism” axis, with hypo-mentalists having a deficient theory-of-mind that commits Type II error and fails to perceive agency while hyper-mentalists have a promiscuous teleology (to a greater degree than average). Bradcock sees these disorders as the result of a genetic tug-of-war between the interests of fathers (who cannot be sure the siblings of their biological son also belong to them) and mothers, drawing on the ideas of Robert Trivers.
Bradcock seemed to be pushing my bias buttons by associating those blasted hyper-mentalists with confidence men, pseudo-science, politicians, lawyers and holism. Riffing off the post Robin Hanson judged the most dense with useful info on identifying our biases he’s ever written, I don’t view history culminating with our war against a united alien invasion. Them is us. Or maybe they’re alien to me. Perhaps I should say when reading Bradcock on mentalistic cognition I don’t primarily see a group of people, but the flaws of humanity. I don’t see an axis and seek “balance” (a word holistic pseudo-science constantly yammers on about), I feel the urge to excise a contamination. That’s Jonathan Haidt’s sanctity/disgust factor of morality, which I admitted to having an irrationally strong sense of here. Recently Hopefully Anonymous chided me for indulging in unthinking lawyer-bashing, and while I still think they shouldn’t make up over half our legislators, I admit that I let the joy of sticking it to THEM control discussion of the issue.