[ZunarJ5]

ADHD is a neurological disorder and can be seen with neurological imaging. They are statistically abnormal variations in the brain that do not correlate with the normal sizes or functions across the rest of the population. This makes them an outlier. There is a long track record of studies showing dysfunction in several areas with these variations that gradually cause harm to those with these conditions. This is not a "right" or "wrong" way to human question. It's a medical condition that makes people's lives harder.

[ParetoOptimal]

This is the strongest argument I had in mind. Another good source for arguments along these lines is The science of ADHD[0].

0: https://chadd.org/about-adhd/the-science-of-adhd/

[datathrow0007]

The basic error underlying this line of thinking was covered above, but I will reiterate. And at risk of sounding cliche, without taking the holistic picture into mind, the only thing being observed is a different part of an elephant.

Statistical observation against a greater sample is flawed. That would necessitate that there is an ideal state of human functioning (mentally/physiologically/etc.). While I'm certain there is a local ideal per individual, and that many features for an idealized "perfect state" are shared among many (e.g. proper diet, rest, etc.); psychology is not so simple. Again, dysfunction in the brain would necessitate there being an ideal state of function -- which has not been defined or determined outside of individual traits that have been interpreted to be at odds with various (subjective) ideals of being.

I do realize that certain physiological states make it subjectively harder to exist in one's specific environment. My issue is with taking this as given fact, rather than interpretation -- that there is an abstract and all-encompassing ideal to be reached, regardless of the individual.

This is ignoring the erroneous usage of medical measurements for purposes of "matter-of-fact" and not recognizing that measuring physchological behavior, as by-product of the underlying nervous system and all the other bodily systems, is correlative. To use a simplified example: if you take an EEG of an "ADHD" brain against an average sample of "non-ADHD," yes it will look different. If I were to steelman it, I would swap out "non-ADHD" for those with prefrontal cortex brain damage. Now the results may look similar. However, this doesn't extend to reaching the conclusion that someone with ADHD has brain damage (they may -- but the results are not causative, merely correlative).

Or what I've already written above, that the data measured is the right data to measure.

The environment, the people, their norms, behaviors, and "average" are different depending on the specific geography, and constantly changing. To nail down an "ideal," in spite of the specific circumstances of each individual is -- in my opinion -- misguided. For an off-hand example: a wealthy and erratic person is an eccentric; but a poor and erratic one is clinically insane. Or someone with hallucinations in Western society is a schizophrenic; while in other cultures he may be a shaman.

I want to take a tangential excursion into the various cultures and their implications against an "ideal" a la Quigley and Huntington -- but I've already written too much.

[pseudalopex]

Most of your argumentation fits arthritis equally. Are you so philosophical about arthritis?

I would describe your main point as advocating the social model of disability and completely rejecting the medical model. The social model is a powerful idea. Certainly applying it more would benefit disabled individuals. It is incomplete alone however. And many researchers and practitioners understand the social model better than you seem to think. Ask people who tried for work accommodations if they had problems with their doctor or manager. Ask people with ADHD how it's affected their relationships.