beneficii wrote:
Yeah, I have the same problem with not meeting my potential. It's a bit paradoxical, because it would be too stressful to meet my full potential, but if meeting my full potential is too stressful isn't that a sign that my full potential is less than it appears?
I've always understood "full potential" to mean what you could achieve under ideal circumstances. So if, say, you were incredibly good at physics, you might be intellectually capable of making a brilliant discovery, and that would be "achieving your full potential"; if however your Asperger's made it impossible for you to work in a lab with a bunch of other people, then those less-than-ideal circumstances would stop you from achieving your full potential. But that wouldn't
diminish your potential because if you had a lab to yourself, you could do it.
Sorry, I'm not sure that's as clear as I meant it to be, and anyway, I might be wrong. But that's my take on it.
Or you could be biologically fit to have children but be too brain-damaged to raise any. Maybe you would say
"intellectual potential". I am confused about it too, but no longer ashamed.