Is neurotypical about being ''neutral''?

Post Reply New Topic

I have gathered that Aspie traits are to the extreme (either too much or not enough) sort of thing. Maybe the asocial trait is more of a difficulty, but with all the rest of the traits like the sensory issues, special interests, et cetera, are more taken to an extreme, which can then be grouped together to make up an ASD (including the social difficulties).

Neurology ain't ''all or nothing''. I think NTs usually stay at neutral (maybe one or two traits can be less or more extreme), and Aspies usually go to the extreme with most traits, making them visibly Aspie traits. I don't think personality or IQ necessarily have to count, since some NTs can be bright and others can be dim, but I think they usually range around the average IQ.

Normality is a myth.

Who mentioned the word ''normal''?

"either too much or not enough"

That concept is dependent on a defined norm. If you'd like to degenerate into semantics on "normal" versus "neutral", we can, but my argument is supported by the rest of your statements. You speak of averages regarding intelligence and use the term "extremes" to define autistic traits, therefore implying that neurotypical traits are the norm.

I'm just saying that normality is a social construction that has little functional purpose other than to exclude. Your question for discussion was, "Is neurotypical about being 'neutral'"? and my opinion is no. I reject the concept of neurotypicality as a watermark, or ground zero from which deviation is considered autism.

The word has no scientific or medical value; so it is defined many ways by many sources and different people. A quick search on the internet shows it includes everyone except those on the spectrum, others exclude a range of diagnoses from ADHD to Personality traits as being excluded from the definition of Neurotypical. Your definition is as good as anyone elses, that I have seen.

As far as real life we all make our judgements about people based on preconceived notions of our experience with others; we often have no idea what kind of neurological problems a person has based on the way they present themselves to us.

I think the only useful purpose that the word neurotypical had was describing people off the spectrum in a conversation about autism and interacting with those that we assume don't have the neurology associated with autism. At least at that point most people understood a common definition for the word, even if it had no real practical value outside of a conversation to identify someone with typical neurology.

Most of the discussions on this forum about "neurotypical" are meaningless, because everyone takes it apart with semantic arguments until there's nothing left, or expands the definition until it is relatively meaningless.

Actually sociopaths are the ones that always think in extreme(black/white) terms about everything.

The common definition from Wiki:

Neurotypical people have neurological development and states that are consistent with what most people would perceive as normal, particularly with respect to their ability to process linguistic information and social cues.

The idea of who has normal neurological development and states, is one that only a neurologist could answer. We assume that people that meet the diagnoses of autism have different neurology, but there is no neurological test for it, so a psychiatrist or psychologist determines it from behavioral traits.

If a neurologist and a psychiatrist doesn't have a way to measure the neurological differences in a person with Autism, I'm not sure why the people that came up with the word even use neurology to describe those without the condition, except that it indicates that it is genetic in origin instead of environmental in origin, the way science used to see most other psychological disorders.

It's no longer clear how much genetics and environment play in most disorders with the current state of research, so the question of neurological/genetic differences specific to Autistic individuals as opposed to everyone else is getting more complicated rather than clearer.

In fact, science is finding that many of the same genetic markers associated with autism are associated with other conditions like ADHD, Schizophrenia, and Bi-Polar disorder. And then there are other disabilities that are highly associated with Autism like 22Q11 gene deletion syndrome and Down syndrome. And, further research suggests that Autism is not nearly as heavily influenced by genetics as it once was.

I guess the question becomes is there a politically correct term that is acceptable that could replace neurotypical in our discussions of difficulties with people that do not seem impaired in what is normally seen as an ability to socially interact. I can't think of another term that won't be seen as offensive to one group or the other, so as far as I can see we will have to continue to live with the ambiguities related to the neologism "neurotypical".

I'm not talking about what the words mean. I am talking more about the actual personal differences.

If most Aspies prefer routine, doesn't mean most NTs hate routine and never ever follow anything. If most Aspies have sensitive eyes, doesn't mean most NTs never wear sunglasses and never get blinded by bright sunlight. If most Aspies like computers, doesn't mean most NTs hate computers and never want to use them.

Aspergers is a collection of behavioral traits that make up a syndrome that an individual saw as a result of seeing a pattern of it among people that he observed.

In considering what the personal differences are it might be interesting to look at which members of what we normally consider a part of the general population might fit each criteria of Aspergers and what if any element of the criteria is clearly not seen in the general population.


A.Qualitative impairment in social interaction, as manifested by at least two of the following:

(1) marked impairment in the use of multiple nonverbal behaviors such as eye-to-eye gaze, facial expression, body postures, and gestures to regulate social interaction

Some shy people exhibit an impairment of these abilities.


(2) failure to develop peer relationships appropriate to developmental level.

Some shy people don't make the effort to develop peer relationships.


(3) a lack of spontaneous seeking to share enjoyment, interests, or achievements with other people (e.g., by a lack of showing, bringing, or pointing out objects of interest to other people)


Some shy people don't participate in these behaviors.



(4) lack of social or emotional reciprocity


characteristic seen in some men.



B.Restricted repetitive and stereotyped patterns of behavior, interests, and activities, as manifested by at least one of the following:

(1) encompassing preoccupation with one or more stereotyped and restricted patterns of interest that is abnormal either in intensity or focus


Many people in my area, live and breathe hunting and fishing; and that's all they talk about. There are many other examples like this in the general population. But, I guess since they are practiced in the general population they may be considered normal. It seems to meet this specific definition, though.


(2) apparently inflexible adherence to specific, nonfunctional routines or rituals


Common obsessive and superstitious behavior.


(3) stereotyped and repetitive motor mannerisms (e.g., hand or finger flapping or twisting, or complex whole-body movements)

People rock constantly at times when they are nervous along with a number of other stereotyped and repetitive motor mannerisms; the more unusual motor mannerisms here like hand or finger flapping aren't seen nearly as much as far as I know; so far it seems like the most unusual behaviors specific to Aspergers, but not all people with Aspergers flap their hands or fingers.


(4) persistent preoccupation with parts of objects


This is fairly unusual too, but all people with Aspergers don't exhibit clear signs of the behavior.

C.The disturbance causes clinically significant impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.


Some people have trouble functioning in these areas because of depression, etc. and my understanding is that about 25 percent of the country will suffer from a major episode at some point in there life. Many of the previous criteria could be seen in a depressed individual or a person with severe anxiety as well.

D.There is no clinically significant general delay in language (e.g., single words used by age 2 years, communicative phrases used by age 3 years).


We can assume they don't have an issue here, unless they tell us.

E.There is no clinically significant delay in cognitive development or in the development of age-appropriate self-help skills, adaptive behavior (other than in social interaction), and curiosity about the environment in childhood


Same as previous question.

F.Criteria are not met for another specific Pervasive Developmental Disorder or Schizophrenia.


A Psychiatrist would probably need to determine this one.


If I saw an individual handflapping, my first pre-conceived notion would be Autism. The only people that I have noticed doing this have been clearly identified as being autistic. I can only remember a handful in the general population that I have noticed. It's the only observable element of the criteria that I think would be close to a clear indication by itself of atypical neurology.

I probably wouldn't attribute any one attribute by itself to Asperger's though. I've seen them in too many people that would likely normally be considered part of the general population, with no diagnoses.

Last edited by aghogday on 14 Jul 2011, 7:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Being neurotypical and neutral are two very different things. It's easy to be neutral, but for most of us, we can't be neurotypical.

Small children (say under 5) sometimes flap. But older people don't seem to.

Anyway, no, NT isn't neutral. NTs have a strong obsession with other people, for example. We tend to treat NT as neutral, but you could do that just as easily with any neurological type.

I think this is a part of a bigger phenomenon--the way all mental/neurological/learning disabilities are extremes of the norm.

For example: We all zone out during a boring drive, but it's not pathological. On the other hand, when you zone out uncontrollably and feel constantly distanced from yourself and your surroundings, that's a dissociative disorder.

We all feel sad sometimes and tired sometimes, and that's not pathological. But when you feel constantly tired, sad, and dull to the point that it starts to impair your ability to deal with your life, then that's depression.

We all hallucinate when we're asleep, creating vivid dreams that we usually believe are real while we're in them because our thoughts are too disorganized to reality-test properly. That's normal. But if we were to hallucinate and believe that those hallucinations were real while awake, then that would be psychosis and it would be a problem.

We get distracted, but it's not ADHD. We get proud, but it's not narcissistic personality disorder. We misread something, but it's not dyslexia. We trip over our own feet, but it's not dyspraxia. We go on crash diets without being diagnosable with eating disorders. We struggle to learn something without it being possible to say we have developmental delays.

Autism is the extreme version of many traits found in the NT population. Many NTs have autistic traits and there are many people in the gray middle-ground where the autistic traits are there without causing the significant impairment that calls for a diagnosis.

Don't believe me?

What NT hasn't occasionally been tongue-tied, misheard someone, misunderstood someone, or not been able to retrieve a word that was on the "tip of their tongue"? What NT hasn't occasionally been fascinated by some topic, or had an intense hobby? What NT hasn't been interested in the details of something--if only the details of a newborn child or a lover's face? Most mathematicians, scientists, artists, and detail-oriented factory workers are NTs. There are NTs who are introverted, NTs who are more than usually overwhelmed by their surroundings, and NTs who don't like to have conversations in crowded places because it's harder to follow everyone at once. And yet you can't diagnose them, because they're doing just fine and don't need any help nor use any more effort than anyone else.

In a very real way, autism is a part of the human experience and not nearly as alien and odd as it might at first seem to be.

I agree.

It can be hard being autistic, but life is a struggle for everyone if they live long enough. I know mine was easier than most; challenges and fortune in life are often friends if one continues to accept the challenge of life.

If one lives long enough and makes their world as big as possible they experience an almost infinite number of selves that at some point come close to mirroring the selves of others.

We share too much of the same genetics with the entire human race for any of us to entirely separate ourselves from someone else.

Some need more help to find a path that works than others; that seems to set some apart more than actual differences.

This is exactly what I meant. I'm glad that somebody got what I was talking about in my original post!

Everybody forgets at times, but it's not Dementia. (Just another example).

The reason why I started this thread is because I've seen so many threads that explains AS symptoms from one extreme to another. For example, one week I once saw a thread saying, ''are Aspie kids hyper?'' then in another 4 weeks or so, I came across another new thread saying, ''are Aspie kids unactive and calm?'' And this isn't the only one I've seen. I've seen hundreds of different ones similar, where one week somebody thinks Aspies are A (so you assume NTs are the opposite), then the next week another person thinks Aspies are B. So where does the NT stand? It looks like NTs stand in the middle all the time, where they are neither here nor there. That means NTs must be plain, boring, dull people then.