Peering into the limits of conditional probability, Bayes Thereom, and statistical application in sociological contexts through Neurodivergent and Queer Individuals
ADHD, Autism, Dyspraxia, and Dyslexia are all under the term “neurodiverse”, and make up roughly 30 percent of the population. Interestingly enough, when looking at queer individuals, that number shot up to 70%, meaning that if you identified as being queer, you are more than twice as likely to identify as neurodiverse.
Our sociological models are not advanced enough to know why there is a diversity in human expression in the sub fields of sexuality and neurologically. Although there are theories, there has yet to be a concretely defined reason as to why there is such a large variety in these expressions. In sociological contexts like these, it’s tough use conditional probability to “truly” predict neurodiversity and queerness with each other. Truly in this context means if an individual personally identifies as queer but chooses not to disclose it, or if an individual personally identifies as neurodiverse, but also chooses not to disclose it. Although the article’s data predicts these factors, they are only limited to those who feel the need to disclose these human expressions, and thus, this number is going to vary in different sociological contexts, and does not accurately reflect the true number of neurodiverse and queer individuals.
Through this, we can see the limits of statistical application in complex sociological contexts like these, specifically conditional probability and bayes theorem. These applications only go so far to predict the percentage of data of those who choose to disclose. It may certainly be that there is a correlation or even causation with neurodiversity and queerness, but it may also be that those who have the comfort to disclose one or the other is more likely to disclose both identities, and that there is infact not a correlation between the two as data suggests.
We do not know as of yet with our current scientific and sociological models. I believe that it is thus important that we acknowledge the limits of our current mathematical understandings, and thus place proportionally sound faith in these systems we use to judge and view our world.
https://unorthoboxed.com/2022/04/01/at-the-cross-section-of-neurodiversity-and-lgbtqia/