Page 1 of 1 [ 7 posts ] 

Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

12 Apr 2010, 1:05 pm

True NTs are in the minority when you include all types of neurological conditions, e.g. dyslexia. So, how can they be "typical"? Surely, if they're in the minority, they should be classified as having some sort of disorder? And even if not, they're still not the norm.



0_equals_true
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,038
Location: London

12 Apr 2010, 1:11 pm

This is a good point. There is no NT really. However "NT" is said to represent certian developmental milestones, however this method is not without flaws.



isnessofwhatis
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 11 Mar 2009
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 108

12 Apr 2010, 1:33 pm

there is no such thing as typical or normal. No two people are the same. There are groups of people who share characteristics and that's how we get Asperger's, Bipolar, etc...



CockneyRebel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 118,425
Location: In my little Olympic World of peace and love

12 Apr 2010, 2:01 pm

I think that everybody is a unique person, who is made in God's image.


_________________
The Family Enigma


League_Girl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 27,302
Location: Pacific Northwest

12 Apr 2010, 2:04 pm

Very good point you made. If this place had reputation, I would have given you one.



Valoyossa
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,287
Location: Freie Stadt Danzig

12 Apr 2010, 2:07 pm

They're typical with feeligs and extroversy. They see feelings in other person, for us it's only object.
People can behave different, but they still receive the feelings and can show/hide their own. It's the most important in ide-NT-ity. If they didn't know about their/others' feelings, they wouldn't be NTs.

I hope you understand me :D


_________________
Change Your Frequency, when you're talking to me!
----
Das gehört verboten! http://tinyurl.com/toobigtoosmall size does matter after all
----
My Industrial Love: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBo5K0ZQIEY


Willard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2008
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,647

12 Apr 2010, 2:28 pm

isnessofwhatis wrote:
there is no such thing as typical or normal. No two people are the same. There are groups of people who share characteristics and that's how we get Asperger's, Bipolar, etc...



Actually, there is such a thing as a 'norm' and such a thing as 'typical' - both depend on statistics. If a certain characteristic appears more often than it does not appear, and/or appears more frequently than other similar or associated characteristics, then that characteristic can be considered the 'norm' or 'typical' for that species, or group.

'Normalcy' is a bit more subjective. It would seem reasonable to say that no one individual embodies all characteristics typical of their species or group, but that may not be entirely true.

Its probably more accurate to say that it is rare for any individual to embody all 'typical' characteristics. So, the term NEUROTYPICAL can only correctly be used to describe a specific trait or characteristic. To use NT to generally describe a set of individuals is at best describing a tiny (and possibly mythical) group.

Again, in the sense in which NT is frequently used in these forums, NonAutistic would be more accurate.