What do you call non NT's who arn't aspies?

Post Reply New Topic

LMAO I approve this terminology. xD

Opinions vary on the definitions of what is neurotypical or neuroatypical and some in the neurodiversity movement suggest there is no typical neurology. So the answer is yes, depending on what source of opinion you read or who you ask. If there were medically accepted definitions we could be more confident of what is and what is not, but it's all differing opinions at this point.

I use the term "ND", which means "neurodiverse".

Bruce. They are all named Bruce.

Even the females.

Same for Dyscalcula. I have NT in my profile here on WP but so would anyone not on the autism spectrum. When it comes to choosing a profile tag to post here, NT=not autistic. It would be very confusing if this were not so but it does make this inevitable question come up over and over. Because sometimes NT=not autistic (when self-identifying here) and sometimes it doesn't (perhaps on other websites not related to autism, do boards for schizophrenic people use NT to mean "not schizophrenic"?).

If Dyslexia is considered NaT, then I suppose Dyscalcula is also. Technically it's an impairment since I need to count on my fingers to add single digit numbers and need a calculator to do anything more complex than add or subtract single digit numbers. It doesn't feel like an impairment because calculators exist. It's a technological accomodation so seamless and easy that it doesn't even matter that others around me don't whip out their calculators all the time to do simple math. I get raised eyebrows or smirks or chuckles, but that's about it.

It seems like these terms depend on who you are talking to and in what context. It's ironic that people who dislike language ambiguity have coined a term that is ambiguous and contextual.

"Neurodivergent"

Our very own KenG coined the term.

Naughtistic

I just call them neurologicals.

Depending on which opinion you listen to on the matter, they are usually pretty confident that their opinion is the correct opinion, so it's easy for one to believe that the opinion they heard before was just a confused one. I had to do actual research to do determine how many reliable sources had different opinions on this.

Yes, if you do a google search on dyscalcula and neurodiversity; it is commonly listed as one of the neuroatypical conditions in the neurodiversity movement. The Autism Self Advocacy Network, probably the most popular support site after this site for highly functioning autistic people supports the idea of neurodiversity. Schizophrenics are considered Neuroatypical by some viewpoints, but Schizophrenics haven't established political ideology like Autistic people have. Ideas of Neurotypical, and Neurodiversity are political constructs of the Autistic Community, and have no medical or scientific significance.

Perhaps the most confusing part to me is the fact that Schizophrenia, Parkinsons, and Bi-polar; three conditions, where proven treatments are available, are part of the neurodiversity movement now. I see these conditions as neuroatypical, they have roots in biology and associations with genetics, but the values in neurodiversity state that neurodiverse individuals have differences that should be accepted, and medical treatment is not a necessary component of their lives.

That's a dangerous philosphy for any of the people that have these conditions to adopt. Beyond that, personality disorders are considered as neurodiverse by some opinion, and there is the belief that treatment should not be a necessary component for those disorders either.

I think if the Neurodiversity movement is going to include every mental and neurological disorder the people that support it should adopt a more flexible view in the value and need in treatment for the conditions. While there are differences in neurology in these conditions, they are also disorders, some of which can be potentially life threatening without treatment.

My preconceived notion was these terms had some kind of scientific basis; but I am finding out now that it is political ideology, not unlike conservative and liberal viewpoints, that one can choose to believe in. It's almost like religion: a belief in the neurotypical God vs. the neuroatypical God vs. the Neurodivergent God. Maybe science will provide an answer in the future that we can all agree with.

I personally think the scientific answer is we can't all agree on it because of human nature; it brings us back full circle in what we already knew in our own experience of observing human behavior; there are similarities and differences, and we all tend to come up with our own explanations of what they are and what they mean, and discuss them with each other. Culture continously changes and people continuously change so at best human behavior is a continuous moving target among individuals, that often defies category.

Depends on who's using the term. Some people use it that way.

I would say, in general use, it means those who are in the normal range as far as autistic spectrum traits. Thus, as used, homosexuals (if not on the spectrum) would be NTs.




I tend to see neurotypical as a range. Neurotypical people aren't all alike, but they are within a certain range.

And, yes, I think people can be outside that range without the difference being a disorder.

Would that be NAT?