Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. Do you think you are neurodivergent?

Do you think you are neurodivergent?

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
36 Indlæg 23 Posters 5 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • geepawhill@mastodon.socialG geepawhill@mastodon.social

    Do you think you are neurodivergent?

    This is not a question about diagnosis. If you think you are, the answer is yes.

    As always, please boost.

    sjaakkeuvelaar@mastodon.nlS This user is from outside of this forum
    sjaakkeuvelaar@mastodon.nlS This user is from outside of this forum
    sjaakkeuvelaar@mastodon.nl
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #25

    @GeePawHill
    Well, I never had an ADHD diagno… LOOK! A SQUIRREL!

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • somebody@circumstances.runS somebody@circumstances.run

      @GeePawHill Huge +1 for saying "normal isn't actually a thing". The reason for my "no" answer is simple: I don't think neurotypes exist in the same way Judith Butler doesn't think genders exist; which is to way, they're a reduction of the actual person that forces valuation of traits on Cartesian axes, which results in an intractible situation that brings you out to infinite axes and still no closer to apprehension of the preson. In other words, the quantitative judgment of a trait being more or less present is already a mistake in first principles, that is, there are as many types as there are individuals.

      What exists is truly qualities and events, and these qualities and events when interacting across and within people form a directed graph of sorts, which is not a quantity and no subgraph which is a quantity is a complete representation of a person. The seeming quantifiable traits are, at least in my mind, caused by schizmogenesis and a tendency for people to mimic each other in order to form groups that make them feel less alone. I see this all the time in in-groups, and things are invented constantly so we can all say "we're alike!" But this is the reaction to alienation, it doesn't bring us any closer to understanding each other or ourselves.

      In my mind the universal properties that commute across all these structures are pain and exaltation. We laugh and cry when we recognize these things alone, because they commute. At least in my observation, I have met many people who everyone swore up and down were totally unreachable, couldn't get any better from any therapy or any advice or even any material support or addiction treatment, nothing, but what actually did start to make a difference was empathy and mercy.

      A suffering soul is like a skeptic, made (traumatized!) by way of a betrayal, waiting for formal proof that the structures in them have a universal property that commutes across someone else before they declare it worthwhile to try. The only way to prove that is to strip away every single label and encounter them naked with no titles, deeds, diagnoses, masks, acts, or pretenses, a mere being. When you get down to the bottom of it, they're not made of a list of labels or a panel of switches. They're the center of a tangled knot of qualified attachments and harms.

      lizzard@social.tchncs.deL This user is from outside of this forum
      lizzard@social.tchncs.deL This user is from outside of this forum
      lizzard@social.tchncs.de
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #26

      @somebody 💚

      @GeePawHill

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • geepawhill@mastodon.socialG geepawhill@mastodon.social

        Do you think you are neurodivergent?

        This is not a question about diagnosis. If you think you are, the answer is yes.

        As always, please boost.

        mbeverding@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
        mbeverding@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
        mbeverding@mastodon.social
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #27

        @GeePawHill y'all getting a diagnosis is important. It will help y'all take steps to make whatever you have your superpower. Being neurodivergent just means you are wired different and hence will have strengths and weaknesses.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • geepawhill@mastodon.socialG geepawhill@mastodon.social

          To my neurodiverse associates, and to my neurotypical associates as well, I wish mostly that we could stop causing each other pain.

          "Normal" isn't actually a thing.

          In high-dimensional spaces, there really is no "average". That's mathematical, not polemical.

          But it's polemical, too.

          MORE SLACK. SEND MORE SLACK.

          This life is hard as fuck, and everyone around you is doing the best they can to manage it.

          bronwyn@sfba.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
          bronwyn@sfba.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
          bronwyn@sfba.social
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #28

          @GeePawHill I have found that complex PTSD in my case mimics some autism and ADHD traits.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • geepawhill@mastodon.socialG geepawhill@mastodon.social

            Do you think you are neurodivergent?

            This is not a question about diagnosis. If you think you are, the answer is yes.

            As always, please boost.

            paelse@mastodon.onlineP This user is from outside of this forum
            paelse@mastodon.onlineP This user is from outside of this forum
            paelse@mastodon.online
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #29

            @GeePawHill none of your business

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • walruths@mastodon.socialW walruths@mastodon.social

              @GeePawHill

              My perpetual bad/good/weird trait is that I'm subconsciously inconsistent at everything, even my tastes, preferences, where I sleep, what I eat. There's no pattern to anything. Chaos and variety reign supreme in my life. A new song is always better than an old one, a new soap is better than the last, a different color, left not right, side streets not the highway,... Why? It just is. Maybe I wanna see what happens. I crave it, tossing a wrench into everything.

              My 'usual', is chaos.

              econads@mendeddrum.orgE This user is from outside of this forum
              econads@mendeddrum.orgE This user is from outside of this forum
              econads@mendeddrum.org
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #30

              @Walruths @GeePawHill

              Same but maybe not as much. I'll pretty much always take the novel over the mundane, because why wouldn't you? Life is too be lived. I'm not sure that's what makes me ADHD (but the other things though most likely do).

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • geepawhill@mastodon.socialG geepawhill@mastodon.social

                I am.

                *Definitely* I am.

                I don't fit in any of the usual categories, tbh.

                I am not autistic. I am not ADHD.

                I have stripes of OCD, but they don't, like, they don't quite add up to a diagnosis.

                cmw@dysfunctional.technologyC This user is from outside of this forum
                cmw@dysfunctional.technologyC This user is from outside of this forum
                cmw@dysfunctional.technology
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #31

                @GeePawHill
                Does this still hold true on DSM-5/ICD-11? They vastly expanded diagnosis options. Things that traditionally didn't add ip to a diagnosis now might.

                cmw@dysfunctional.technologyC 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • cmw@dysfunctional.technologyC cmw@dysfunctional.technology

                  @GeePawHill
                  Does this still hold true on DSM-5/ICD-11? They vastly expanded diagnosis options. Things that traditionally didn't add ip to a diagnosis now might.

                  cmw@dysfunctional.technologyC This user is from outside of this forum
                  cmw@dysfunctional.technologyC This user is from outside of this forum
                  cmw@dysfunctional.technology
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #32

                  @GeePawHill
                  If that's something you're interested in

                  geepawhill@mastodon.socialG 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • cmw@dysfunctional.technologyC cmw@dysfunctional.technology

                    @GeePawHill
                    If that's something you're interested in

                    geepawhill@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                    geepawhill@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                    geepawhill@mastodon.social
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #33

                    @cmw DSM-V is not really a rig I quite trust.

                    geepawhill@mastodon.socialG cmw@dysfunctional.technologyC 2 Replies Last reply
                    0
                    • geepawhill@mastodon.socialG geepawhill@mastodon.social

                      @cmw DSM-V is not really a rig I quite trust.

                      geepawhill@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                      geepawhill@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                      geepawhill@mastodon.social
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #34

                      @cmw The old terminology wrt depression I thought was pretty good, actually.

                      "Situational" vs "clinical".

                      As happens, I know a lot about depression, and my reaction to the new version was, well, I'm not a specialist or a pro, but, in my view, it was sketchy.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • geepawhill@mastodon.socialG geepawhill@mastodon.social

                        @cmw DSM-V is not really a rig I quite trust.

                        cmw@dysfunctional.technologyC This user is from outside of this forum
                        cmw@dysfunctional.technologyC This user is from outside of this forum
                        cmw@dysfunctional.technology
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #35

                        @GeePawHill
                        Oh, yeah, very different topic, trust in the system.
                        Same for ICD. -11 improved some things around mental health here in EU, or will have in another decade, when its finally properly rolled out. Under -10 I wouldn't have gotten my adhd diagnosis for example, as my flavor is less physically expressive. DSM-V helped there, to provide a basis

                        geepawhill@mastodon.socialG 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • cmw@dysfunctional.technologyC cmw@dysfunctional.technology

                          @GeePawHill
                          Oh, yeah, very different topic, trust in the system.
                          Same for ICD. -11 improved some things around mental health here in EU, or will have in another decade, when its finally properly rolled out. Under -10 I wouldn't have gotten my adhd diagnosis for example, as my flavor is less physically expressive. DSM-V helped there, to provide a basis

                          geepawhill@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                          geepawhill@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                          geepawhill@mastodon.social
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #36

                          @cmw Even now, tho, it's shot through with Cartesian dualism that *nobody* serious believes in.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • anderslund@expressional.socialA anderslund@expressional.social shared this topic
                          Svar
                          • Svar som emne
                          Login for at svare
                          • Ældste til nyeste
                          • Nyeste til ældste
                          • Most Votes


                          • Log ind

                          • Login or register to search.
                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                          Graciously hosted by data.coop
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          0
                          • Hjem
                          • Seneste
                          • Etiketter
                          • Populære
                          • Verden
                          • Bruger
                          • Grupper