greenblue wrote:
LabPet wrote:
NathanYoung wrote:
I don't believe in the N.T concept. It's based on a pseudo cultural fallacy of mind differences manifested of mostly unneeded and divisional social discourses.
No. In neuroscience & elsewhere related, as common knowledge (I'm a neuroscientist) this term, Neurotypical (NT) just means one who is not autistic.
well, the term neurotypical used by the autistic community as well as the neurodiversity movement have seem to be questionable to me, given the social, cultural and political issues, I get the neurological differences from autistics and non-autistics, but labeling neurotypical to non-autistics individuals within neuroscience, is something that I honestly find somehow difficult to grasp, I mean, non-autistic people can have neurological differences or disorders, whichever term you prefer, given that, I ask, how valid and accurate is to label such individual as neurotypical?
I am a chemist, now a grad student in Neuroscience. What I related, about the terminology of 'Neurotypical,' which means 'One who is not Autistic' I was not guessing or assigning a value statement - this is just a given. Much like saying, "Michael is male, whereas Claire is female." There is no right or wrong, good or bad - the term 'Neurotypical' is as defined.
I hope that clarifies. The definition is objective, as a diagnostic label - nothing more, nothing less. And, yes, the term Neurotypical is perfectly ok to use and say. And understood in the field of Neuroscience.
_________________
The ones who say “You can’t” and “You won’t” are probably the ones scared that you will. - Unknown