Thanks so much for all the thoughtful comments on this video! Really appreciate everyone engaging with this topic. If you’re interested in more on neurodiversity, Nat did a TEDx talk diving deeper into these ideas. Here’s the link if you'd like to check it out: th-cam.com/video/Fx2-VHDLJT0/w-d-xo.html 😊
aren't we all neurodiverse? the way I understand the terminology, neurodiversity is like biodiversity. the whole human race is neurodiverse. anyone who is not autistic/dyslexic etc. is neurotypical. the rest of us are neurodivergent. thanks for the book summary
Hi @tracirex, Great observation! Yes, in a broad sense, everyone contributes to "neurodiversity," much like how all species contribute to biodiversity. But as you noted, the term is often used to distinguish between "neurotypical" individuals and those who are "neurodivergent" (like autistic, dyslexic, ADHD). It’s a helpful way to talk about differences in brain function without pathologising them. Thanks for sharing your thoughts! Very best, Nat
Regarding DX'ing people who can't be asked (like the deceased), I recommend anyone who likes Anime to watch Psycho Pass if you have not yet. It's all about this. Well, sort of abstracted, but it's about 'diagnosing' people as 'undesirable' in society and what that would actually look like if we hand society over to people willing to do that. I personally think it's fine to say "Einstein was possibly autistic because of..." but then the way the public, the average person, handles information, it instantly becomes problematic. But, the good(?) news is... that's how ALL information works! Nothing special about this category! At the end of the day, a REAL DX is something you can ONLY do via interview, so until that's possible with dead people and not just their AI, then it will be impossible to say for sure. Again, like ALL past events. Everything is just 'best guess' if it can't be actively sampled. (See: Quantum physics!)
You raise a great point about the complexity of diagnosing historical figures and the nuances of handling such information. Your reference to "Psycho Pass" is an interesting way to illustrate the societal implications of categorising people. It's true, diagnosing someone like Einstein as possibly autistic can be speculative, and how the public interprets such information is always a challenge. This is indeed a common issue across various fields, where definitive conclusions are often elusive. For more on understanding and supporting neurodiversity, Exceptional Individuals hosts insightful events which might interest you. More info at: www.eventbrite.co.uk/o/exceptional-individuals-12111155769.
I just finished reading this book. This is a great de brief. Thank you. Much enjoyed both.
I'm glad you enjoyed the book and found the debrief helpful. Thank you for sharing your feedback!
Thanks so much for all the thoughtful comments on this video! Really appreciate everyone engaging with this topic. If you’re interested in more on neurodiversity, Nat did a TEDx talk diving deeper into these ideas. Here’s the link if you'd like to check it out: th-cam.com/video/Fx2-VHDLJT0/w-d-xo.html 😊
Agree
aren't we all neurodiverse? the way I understand the terminology, neurodiversity is like biodiversity. the whole human race is neurodiverse. anyone who is not autistic/dyslexic etc. is neurotypical. the rest of us are neurodivergent. thanks for the book summary
Hi @tracirex,
Great observation! Yes, in a broad sense, everyone contributes to "neurodiversity," much like how all species contribute to biodiversity. But as you noted, the term is often used to distinguish between "neurotypical" individuals and those who are "neurodivergent" (like autistic, dyslexic, ADHD). It’s a helpful way to talk about differences in brain function without pathologising them. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Very best,
Nat
Regarding DX'ing people who can't be asked (like the deceased), I recommend anyone who likes Anime to watch Psycho Pass if you have not yet. It's all about this. Well, sort of abstracted, but it's about 'diagnosing' people as 'undesirable' in society and what that would actually look like if we hand society over to people willing to do that.
I personally think it's fine to say "Einstein was possibly autistic because of..." but then the way the public, the average person, handles information, it instantly becomes problematic. But, the good(?) news is... that's how ALL information works! Nothing special about this category! At the end of the day, a REAL DX is something you can ONLY do via interview, so until that's possible with dead people and not just their AI, then it will be impossible to say for sure. Again, like ALL past events. Everything is just 'best guess' if it can't be actively sampled. (See: Quantum physics!)
You raise a great point about the complexity of diagnosing historical figures and the nuances of handling such information. Your reference to "Psycho Pass" is an interesting way to illustrate the societal implications of categorising people. It's true, diagnosing someone like Einstein as possibly autistic can be speculative, and how the public interprets such information is always a challenge. This is indeed a common issue across various fields, where definitive conclusions are often elusive. For more on understanding and supporting neurodiversity, Exceptional Individuals hosts insightful events which might interest you. More info at: www.eventbrite.co.uk/o/exceptional-individuals-12111155769.
𝓅𝓇o𝓂o𝓈𝓂 🌺