3 ms·

I mean yes but the article fundamentally misrepresents ADHD and “disorders” in general. A “disorder” is a set of symptoms or traits that cause the person or the

I mean yes but the article fundamentally misrepresents ADHD and “disorders” in general. A “disorder” is a set of symptoms or traits that cause the person or their loved ones distress or trouble taking care of themselves in their daily lives. So it’s possible to “have ADHD” without it being a “disorder”. It’s also the case that humans have a wide variety of behavioral and personality traits many of which are influenced by genes. All of those have a potential evolutionary impact. Whether they constitute a “disorder” depends on how they impact the individual in their given environment. A person living in an entirely different world (eg a hunter gatherer society) than we inhabit today may be disordered for that world but would thrive in our world and vice versa—some traits that are a problem in the modern world would suit the ancient lifestyle well. In the end, ADHD and lots of other psychological disorders are wildly misunderstood by doctors, reporters, and the patients themselves. But it all comes down to the question: do these traits negatively impact your life or the life of those around you? If they cause distress in daily living then it’s a “disorder”. If those same traits are not a problem for someone else, then it isn’t.

Nevermark 3y ago
> do these traits ynegatively impact your life or the life of those around you? If they cause distress in daily living then it’s a “disorder”. If those same traits are not a problem for someone else, then it isn’t. Agree with this. And even when they do cause distress, it’s not uncommon for ADHD to also be associated with positive attributes as well. Genes are not selected to make us reliably happy, but successful in a statistical way in some environment. So “disorder” definitely overstates a negative interpretation. EDIT: A term like “processing style” would be less pejorative or opinionated. Every common processing style that can be “high functioning” has its advantages, disadvantages, coping strategies, and ideal support systems. None of us was born complete, a master of all thinking styles, and without the need for other kinds of people. FURTHER EDIT: re another common “processing style”, I have dealt with more than one productive narcissist for extended time frames. Things did not always go well is an understatement. But not always badly either - they both had many accomplishments directly helped by their “disorder”. The mix of positive and negative features of that, not to mention the achievements of many famous people with elements of that, also suggest we need a better word than “disorder”. Even worse in that case, the connotations of the words “narcissist” and “disorder” create a particularly strong resistance for people with those traits to learn more about themselves or openly deal with their thinking style in a practical open way. Completely perverse terminology for knowledge that by another name could better help those people and those around them!

Nevermark 3y ago

> do these traits ynegatively impact your life or the life of those around you? If they cause distress in daily living then it’s a “disorder”. If those same traits are not a problem for someone else, then it isn’t. Agree with this. And even when they do cause distress, it’s not uncommon for ADHD to also be associated with positive attributes as well. Genes are not selected to make us reliably happy, but successful in a statistical way in some environment. So “disorder” definitely overstates a negative interpretation. EDIT: A term like “processing style” would be less pejorative or opinionated. Every common processing style that can be “high functioning” has its advantages, disadvantages, coping strategies, and ideal support systems. None of us was born complete, a master of all thinking styles, and without the need for other kinds of people. FURTHER EDIT: re another common “processing style”, I have dealt with more than one productive narcissist for extended time frames. Things did not always go well is an understatement. But not always badly either - they both had many accomplishments directly helped by their “disorder”. The mix of positive and negative features of that, not to mention the achievements of many famous people with elements of that, also suggest we need a better word than “disorder”. Even worse in that case, the connotations of the words “narcissist” and “disorder” create a particularly strong resistance for people with those traits to learn more about themselves or openly deal with their thinking style in a practical open way. Completely perverse terminology for knowledge that by another name could better help those people and those around them!