5 ms·

if I could go back in time and become normal I don't know if this is good news, or bad news but... there is no normal. I know what you meant, what it would be

if I could go back in time and become normal I don't know if this is good news, or bad news but... there is no normal. I know what you meant, what it would be like without ASD. But I'm not sure that would give you any particular insight into anything other than simply being a different person.

Zenst 7y ago
Agreed and yes, normal is a perception based upon a mode average. After all, if the majority of people were psychopaths, normal would take on a whole new meaning. Equally it is hard to evaluate such a different timeline as you are evaluating from a different perspective/timeline.
- technothrasher 7y ago
  Yes, you end up very quickly in Thomas Nagel's "What is it like to be a bat?" scenario. You can't ever know what it is like to be another person (or animal) because as soon as you are that other thing, you are no longer you. If you were still you, you wouldn't be that other thing so you still wouldn't have that knowledge.
mrlala 7y ago
>there is no normal I mean, yeah there is? There are 7 billion people on this planet. If you could create some score of peoples intelligence, how they react/respond to people, their normal physical movements and put that into a distribution the autistic people would definitely be on the tail end of the curves. Sure everyone is different in various ways- but a lot of those differences are very small compared to the differences exhibited by autistic people. I can give you a direct example- my oldest son has.. something. We had him tested for autism when he was younger and were basically told that yeah there is 'something'. He's not technically autistic, or at least not the level where he needs extreme special stuff, but he does exhibit some of the traits of autistic children, just in a more minor way. So for lack of any better term he is "very slightly autistic". At 7 years old he has an insane memory (closest to "photographic" that I've ever encountered) and seems highly intelligent in some areas (but definitely not in others! it's quite incredible actually to see sometimes..). He has some of the physical traits where he can't really sit still, needs weighted blankets, has some of those unique arm movements of autistic people.. but again fairly subtle. A lot of things to him can be more black/white than gray, because he seems to need to fit everything into a very specific bucket in his mind. Every teacher he has had, including some which work with the more special ed kids, has said "yeah there is... something different about him". Now conversely, my younger child I would classify as "normal". Why do I say that? Well.. I worked at co-op preschools with both of my boys for years. I saw lots of kids. And when you see a ton of kids and play/interact with them... I mean yeah there is a normal. Normal is how you would expect someone to behave and interact with. There is a relatively normal way you would expect a 7 year old to respond in various situations, etc. Anyway- sorry for writing a book. I guess I'm putting off work.. I just found it a bit strange to not accept that, well, most people are actually pretty darn similar while a minority of people are very different. I see it every day in my house!
- danielg6 7y ago
  It’s just semantics. There are negative connotations associated with calling someone “normal” versus “abnormal”. I’m sure you’re polite enough to not describe people in wheel chairs as “abnormal”. The non-controversial terms that people use related to issues like autism are “neurotypical” and “neurodivergent”.
  - mrlala 7y ago
    >It’s just semantics No it's not... I was responding to someone who said there is no "normal". Yeah, there is. Most people behave in a way you would expect. Most people exhibit motor controls the way you would expect. A minority of people, and specifically people with autism, really do think in a "different" way and exhibit strange motor functions at times that most people do not. I don't think we have to dance around politically correct terms here. I'm using normal in the statistical sense. Statistically, most people are very neurologically similar and then some people are (relatively) wildly different.
    - danielg6 7y ago
      > I’m using normal in the statistical sense Which is semantics. You’re using a different meaning of the word to fit your point just like the person did in the grandfather comment. You even put the word normal in quotes yourself indicating that you understand how words can be interpreted differently. I wasn’t disagreeing with your interpretation of the term.
    - navigatesol 7y ago
      >Most people behave in a way you would expect. This is absurd. How do you have any idea what "you would expect"? >I'm using normal in the statistical sense. Statistically, most people are very neurologically similar and then some people are (relatively) wildly different. First, define "very neurologically similar". Second, "most people are similar" in a normal distribution because that's the way the distribution is defined. It's not some biological coincidence.
      - 7y ago
SkyBelow 7y ago
> there is no normal. In a classroom of 30 students, where 1 is viewed by the rest as abnormal, there is normal. Yes, it is only a social construct whose impact is based on our personal experience and the society in which we live, but this is true of many things which I think we would not tolerate being dismissed so readily.
- roguecoder 7y ago
  But that's not what happens, despite what people seem to think. On average 1 of those students will be Autistic, but also 3 of those students will have ADHD, 2 or 3 will have "personality disorders", 2 will experience childhood trauma, 1 will be a high-testosterone child assigned the sex "female" at birth, 3 will have specific learning disabilities and 1 or 2 will be considered "gifted". When half the class isn't neurotypical, being neurotypical isn't any more "normal" than having blue eyes is "normal".
blueprint 7y ago
Normal means conformance to e.g. a standard. Let's assume the reasonable communal standard of 'factuality', i.e. 'what exists in facts'. Individuals may not be able to tell with 100% precision about the entirety of a fact. But if we take some math problems like 1+3, 2+2, 5+5, etc., and have a person going around believing, teaching, and attempting to apply a different principle (equation, i.e. meaning/relationship of the numbers) then they're going to get different answers. It's wrong to say that 1+1=3 as if it's mathematics. Therefore, it's natural and consistent to conclude that a person who has the wrong answer or wrong view of questions cannot behave normally to those questions nor to the standard of 'what is' in the questions. Have you ever heard that angle on the matter?

Zenst 7y ago

Agreed and yes, normal is a perception based upon a mode average. After all, if the majority of people were psychopaths, normal would take on a whole new meaning. Equally it is hard to evaluate such a different timeline as you are evaluating from a different perspective/timeline.

technothrasher 7y ago
Yes, you end up very quickly in Thomas Nagel's "What is it like to be a bat?" scenario. You can't ever know what it is like to be another person (or animal) because as soon as you are that other thing, you are no longer you. If you were still you, you wouldn't be that other thing so you still wouldn't have that knowledge.

mrlala 7y ago

>there is no normal I mean, yeah there is? There are 7 billion people on this planet. If you could create some score of peoples intelligence, how they react/respond to people, their normal physical movements and put that into a distribution the autistic people would definitely be on the tail end of the curves. Sure everyone is different in various ways- but a lot of those differences are very small compared to the differences exhibited by autistic people. I can give you a direct example- my oldest son has.. something. We had him tested for autism when he was younger and were basically told that yeah there is 'something'. He's not technically autistic, or at least not the level where he needs extreme special stuff, but he does exhibit some of the traits of autistic children, just in a more minor way. So for lack of any better term he is "very slightly autistic". At 7 years old he has an insane memory (closest to "photographic" that I've ever encountered) and seems highly intelligent in some areas (but definitely not in others! it's quite incredible actually to see sometimes..). He has some of the physical traits where he can't really sit still, needs weighted blankets, has some of those unique arm movements of autistic people.. but again fairly subtle. A lot of things to him can be more black/white than gray, because he seems to need to fit everything into a very specific bucket in his mind. Every teacher he has had, including some which work with the more special ed kids, has said "yeah there is... something different about him". Now conversely, my younger child I would classify as "normal". Why do I say that? Well.. I worked at co-op preschools with both of my boys for years. I saw lots of kids. And when you see a ton of kids and play/interact with them... I mean yeah there is a normal. Normal is how you would expect someone to behave and interact with. There is a relatively normal way you would expect a 7 year old to respond in various situations, etc. Anyway- sorry for writing a book. I guess I'm putting off work.. I just found it a bit strange to not accept that, well, most people are actually pretty darn similar while a minority of people are very different. I see it every day in my house!

danielg6 7y ago
It’s just semantics. There are negative connotations associated with calling someone “normal” versus “abnormal”. I’m sure you’re polite enough to not describe people in wheel chairs as “abnormal”. The non-controversial terms that people use related to issues like autism are “neurotypical” and “neurodivergent”.
- mrlala 7y ago
  >It’s just semantics No it's not... I was responding to someone who said there is no "normal". Yeah, there is. Most people behave in a way you would expect. Most people exhibit motor controls the way you would expect. A minority of people, and specifically people with autism, really do think in a "different" way and exhibit strange motor functions at times that most people do not. I don't think we have to dance around politically correct terms here. I'm using normal in the statistical sense. Statistically, most people are very neurologically similar and then some people are (relatively) wildly different.
  - danielg6 7y ago
    > I’m using normal in the statistical sense Which is semantics. You’re using a different meaning of the word to fit your point just like the person did in the grandfather comment. You even put the word normal in quotes yourself indicating that you understand how words can be interpreted differently. I wasn’t disagreeing with your interpretation of the term.
  - navigatesol 7y ago
    >Most people behave in a way you would expect. This is absurd. How do you have any idea what "you would expect"? >I'm using normal in the statistical sense. Statistically, most people are very neurologically similar and then some people are (relatively) wildly different. First, define "very neurologically similar". Second, "most people are similar" in a normal distribution because that's the way the distribution is defined. It's not some biological coincidence.
    - 7y ago

SkyBelow 7y ago

> there is no normal. In a classroom of 30 students, where 1 is viewed by the rest as abnormal, there is normal. Yes, it is only a social construct whose impact is based on our personal experience and the society in which we live, but this is true of many things which I think we would not tolerate being dismissed so readily.

roguecoder 7y ago
But that's not what happens, despite what people seem to think. On average 1 of those students will be Autistic, but also 3 of those students will have ADHD, 2 or 3 will have "personality disorders", 2 will experience childhood trauma, 1 will be a high-testosterone child assigned the sex "female" at birth, 3 will have specific learning disabilities and 1 or 2 will be considered "gifted". When half the class isn't neurotypical, being neurotypical isn't any more "normal" than having blue eyes is "normal".

blueprint 7y ago

Normal means conformance to e.g. a standard. Let's assume the reasonable communal standard of 'factuality', i.e. 'what exists in facts'. Individuals may not be able to tell with 100% precision about the entirety of a fact. But if we take some math problems like 1+3, 2+2, 5+5, etc., and have a person going around believing, teaching, and attempting to apply a different principle (equation, i.e. meaning/relationship of the numbers) then they're going to get different answers. It's wrong to say that 1+1=3 as if it's mathematics. Therefore, it's natural and consistent to conclude that a person who has the wrong answer or wrong view of questions cannot behave normally to those questions nor to the standard of 'what is' in the questions. Have you ever heard that angle on the matter?