Is there even such a thing as NT's anymore?

Post Reply New Topic

As far as I'm aware the term 'Neurotypical' doesn't even exist outside of the Autsitic community, and is only used to describe those not on the spectrum, and has nothing to do with other mental disorders. The word was supposedly invented by people with Apserger's Syndrome. It's barely even a real thing, just a word that gets thrown around because it is convenient.

Maybe there's a "Neurotypical Myth" and it doesn't exist. The legendary neurotypical existence is a fabrication, an idealized version of a life that cannot be obtained.

Perhaps I should continue the conversation I had with the Quack. After this moment of laughter, he took me to the break area, got some coffee, and then he proceeded to show me the mechanical room for the floor he leases. He opened it up and said, “Tell me what you think, are my maintenance guys doing their job or what”. I had no idea where this came from; I thought, “Wow, he is going to help me get a contract job”. NOT, he said, “take a look around, is it all up to code?” I had no problem pointing out Major violations in the construction design of the electrical installation and sprinkler system. He abruptly closed the door and said “If you mention this to anyone, I will sew your mind shut”.

Point being, there is a Standard Model. This model has many variables, each of which is a part of the system as a whole. In the example of the office building mentioned above, there are clear cut guidelines to follow, such as the blueprint clearly states that all penetrations into and out of any firewall are to be effectively sealed using an industry approved compound. The architect knows about it, the engineer knows about, the building contractor knows about it. However, the guy actually doing it is approved by default because he is an employee of the Building contractor. This building contractor has a name and a title and insurance and is part of the breakfast club where the building inspector also happens to be a member. The result is the building is approved with an on-site inspection, he merely inspected the blueprints and the reputation of the contractor. The end result is the firewall is no long a firewall because of all the holes punched through it.

Same principle applies with the DSM IV and your local interpreter. There are many variables and opinions open for interpretation as per the term “mentally stable”. Truth is, if you are a human, chances are at one point or another you will know what mentally unstable means up close in a personal way, well before getting your name on a plaque with a bunch of fancy letters behind it. Just to be in the medical / psychiatric field at all, is an indication of co-dependence. So to put it bluntly, there is no such thing as the genetically perfect human, every single human is on the spectrum somewhere in some way or another, some are just more colorful than others. Once the genetically perfect human is created however, there will be an equal amount of biased opinions about hair color, shoulders, waist, legs and so on. Again, it is all subjective to ones point of view and how many points of view are bought and sold. It is not a very perfect system after all.

Very well stated, and an excellent analogy taboot!

Thank you, I will relay the compliment to the Quack. Though he he admits he's crazy, he claims he is not crazy about me being on internet forums.

I then asked "Can I come speak at one of your forums?"

His reply was "No, but I can get you on stage...as a poster child"

"Show me a sane man, and I will cure him." Karl Jung

NTs still well over 90 percent of the human race.

ruveyn

Suppose that you can find out 5 different areas (intelligence, social behaviour, language, body movement, etc..) then by the gaussian distribution 68% of the population will be in the standard deviation gap. Now consider the 5 different areas unrelated, the chance for a person to be average in everything is 0.68^5 = 0.12 = 12%. Increasing the number of "areas" will decrease that number further. Well actually the gaussian is only an approximation, I'm pretty sure that there are at least 2 spikes and that the distribution tails are "bigger" than in gaussian distribution those because people tend to create "sub-groups" due to affinity (that's exactly the reason from an evolution point of view for the emergence of races).

If we say NT = Normal then I think there is a very very little % of people there. If NT = not higly AS (everyone has some AS trait, in the AQ test: male = 17, female = 15. Scientist male = 20, scientist female = 18. Science nobel or important scientist in general = 24. AS spectrum > 32) then probably there is around 98-99% of the population (actually I belive that the "real" AS incidence considering also mild Asperger form is around 1/50, because at least 50% of people is un-DXed).

And very accurate, I think. It describes a brain with the most typical wiring.


I don't see what this topic has to do with being NT or not. NT simply means you're not on the autistic spectrum. You can easily be NT and have a mental disorder.

I know some people include things like Down's and schizophrenia in the umbreall term neurodiversity, though. I don't since schizophrenia is a disease, one that usually erupts when the person is in his/her 20's or 30's, not something they struggle with before that, and Downies have NT understanding of body language.

For the record, a survey showed that 20% of the children here has mental problems, mostly anxiety and depression.

I think I'd have to agree. I mean, even people with ADD or Bipolar are pretty "normal".

The only ones who are NT are the ones who are in denial of what they possibly have. IMO.

From my perspective, NT is a function of any particular spectrum of conditions.

For example, with respect to sexuality, NT is heterosexual with a sexual identity consistent with biological sex. Other sexualities and sexual identities then lie on spectra that diverge from that typicality. If you are a heterosexual with a consistent gender identity, then you are NT with respect to that.

With respect to ASDs, NT is to display no characteristics, or so few, or so mild that they do not interfere with daily living. Most of us on this forum do not fall within NT with respect to that.

So it's not so much whethere NT exists, but rather whether any individual is NT with respect to all of the criteria on which typicality can be assessed.

Absolutely. Classification is a major issue in philosophy of science and the general feeling is that it will always be dependent upon the question asked. Everyone is different, hence NT is technically a fiction, a model, an idealisation. However, science has to use idealisations to get itself off the ground, otherwise it could basically say nothing. An NT from the perspective of discussing autism is someone without autistics characteristics, or an NT from the perspective of someone discussing biological mental illness would be anyone with characteristics of any biological mental illness. The meaning of NT changes as the question it is used in is posed.

Consequently, NT is an acceptable phrase when discussing sensory issues or social skills difficulties, or whatever autistic characteristic. Statements about NTs being stupid, ignorant ect is not particularly acceptable since no part of autism entails superior intelligence. (At best, you might posit some of the social side affects of being autistic make us more intelligent, like spending more time on our own reading, but then that is not an issue about neurology but social relations, so call them social relation typicals (SRTs) instead).

Used properly, NT is no worse than the idealisations which the rest of science is heavily dependent upon. However, using it properly severely restricts it use and it seems to me to be a highly misused phrase on this board.

I dunno why people have to complicate this so much. An NT means someone who isn't autistic. What differentiates us from NT's are our body language, facial expressions, way of walking, and sensory sensitivity.

So guess what a person who doesn't have combined traits of sensory sensitivity, odd body and facial expressions, and obsessiveness is?