| Across the spectrum of neurodiversity (incl. ADD & autism), a large gap exists in language for: - common emotional experiences, good and bad - coping patterns for profiling & impedance matching other humans - dysfunctional behavior patterns that should be avoided Sadly, because most of these behaviors have been observed from the viewpoint of medical pathology, many "dictionaries" have a negative slant. E.g. ADD could be a "deficit" of attention, or it could be a "surplus" of attention, e.g. someone switches into a context for a few seconds, then switches out because they are already finished processing it. It's like the duty cycle of an electronic component, forcing the duration to be longer would lead to sensor overload. Someone could be labelled introvert because they can only spend a short amount of time with other people. But perhaps they have low psychic barriers for the energy of other people and are being bombarded with emotions. Is that anti-social or super-social? What if there was standardized terminology for configuring emotional firewalls? The language of disability is often defined by majorities. One ADD person with four non-ADD people may be viewed as "rude" for interrupting before sentences are complete, whereas one non-ADD person among four ADD people may be unable to keep up with five concurrent and tangential conversations where completed sentences are entirely optional. |
Thank you for making that comparison. I still struggle to hold back from finishing others' sentences, even though it seems like I finish them "correctly" more often than not.
I'm also reminded of how how middle eastern peace talks are complicated, in part, by the major differences in conversational styles. One side expects to be interrupted, while the other finds it incredibly rude.