We have discovered a useful sort of a classification system regarding different sorts of thinking coming from different sorts of minds, and named it “neurotype,” clearly just Greek for brain type, perhaps with a connotation of thought type, and it’s good. We count Autism as a neurotype, and ADHD, many things pathologized as “disorders,” in the past work as well or better as entire other brain types than as different problems within a single type – but it is a very difficult concept, akin to the differences between the universe and the multiverse – something of a stretch, honestly, expecting we apes to get our heads around that, at least quickly.
We spend our lives in the zero sum game of trying to psychologize and empathize with other people, and that is impossible enough with infinite variables even if we were all the same between the ears, let alone to multiply the whole deal exponentially upon learning we are not. We’re not there yet, but have faith with me, that no matter how complex reality turns out to be, it is still more workable than a myth or a lie, no matter how simple that is.
It is overwhelming, but it’s where the hope is.
There are the former “disorder,” neurotypes, and there is the former “normal,” type for which mostly they do not generally medicate or lock you up. This seems to have fallen through the cracks as we move from one terminology to another, that a “type,” has more power than a disorder, that “type,” in theory describes all the types, and what it means to be one type or another of that thing – basically that every individual in such a system can be assigned a type, I mean, sometimes you need a “miscellaneous,” type too.
But that’s usually not the majority! The “main,” type of a thing is a type, as much or more than the rest of the types, so it needs a name, and some criteria. “Neurotypical,” tells us the main sort is “typical,” which, this is some criteria for something but it doesn’t apparently reference neurology. What is the average “neurotypical,” person like then?
Hmm. Numerous, you say.
Crowds, then, are neurotypical? We will revisit this non-comedically, I do think so in a way, but for now – China and India must be neurotypical as all get out, huh. Cities in general, LOL.
I think I have a name for that sort that means something about their brains, in the title, Neurorobust. I suppose “neuro,” is redundant, we don’t say, “neuro-Autistic,” do we, it’s a word that references a neurotype already, but “robust,” on its own already is a word – I want to say, “Robustic,” make an adjective of it, match, “Autistic,” call people Autists or Robusts, but it’s a bridge too far – can we carry on with the idea and iron out the word tomorrow, please?
I’ll use that, Neurorobust, today, it’s not perfect, but it does sort of explain itself, it says, “neurotype,” at least, and “robust.”
I’d better explain “robust,” in this context, huh.
The idea is that, starting from my Antisocialization Theory, that what we call the typical neurotype is the human brain in Warrior Mode: strong, aggressive, highly social, meaning, uh, unambivalent in regards to people. Loves ‘em or hates ‘em, to some degree. I mean, “robust,” partially in this group conflict, game theory way, that “strong,” human groups can defend themselves and survive, and also that “strong,” individuals thrive within the group as well, and further that this order of things, that the strong should survive, this attitude is robust and survives attacks from critiques and peaceful social movements.
Being robust is a robust social plan, and so the robust are the typical, or the dominant sort. It works for me many ways, but one of the best is that they will like it, they will agree, it is them, my Neurorobust people for whom this is the highest compliment, “strong and robust.” I think it may fool them into letting it pass. “Robust,” is so positive! It’s Newspeak already; they are going to love it.
More still, every neurorobust brain is tough, and resistant to change.
Like the proverbial Cape Breton man, you can always tell a Neurorobustic – but you can’t tell him much, LOL. The thing I speak of in the previous one, the thing I’m always talking about, the behaviour that ensures the strength, the spanking and the police, these behaviours too – robust AF. Sort of impervious to critique.
So, the form of the word is an issue – but “robust,” is the word, every which way.
And, as I said in a late addition to the previous one, it’s good in its contrast to the former “disorders,” like Autism, in which the many common co-resident health issues show a lack of what we collectively call robustness, of our physiology. That the Autistic mind is not robust, this is a challenging part of the argument, perhaps it is enough to suggest that we have a lot of moving parts, that we require more maintenance, or at least less abuse, because of it. The final piece is Antisocialization Theory, that I don’t think childhood abuse makes at least some Autists more robust, as it would seem to do, by their measures, for most of the Neurorobust.
Again, by their measures, and they see mostly the “strength,” and positively when they do. That’s how their brains seem to work.
Something came up on Twitter, someone saying again, “Nothing about us without us,” because the neurotypical professionals attempts to explain our experience fall dead, and the reason for that is the half baked way we use “neurotype,” again, they speak as though only the former “disorders,” are neurotypes and normal people are not, somehow. Communication will always fail when the speaker is not self-aware, when they think they are some perfectly functional default and not just another weird neurotype. Know thyself – thy neurotype – first. I think it is theoretically possible to speak about others’ neurotype without looking like a fool, but you would have to know you are also a type and what yours is.
Honestly, my hope falters if I think we cannot somehow speak across the gulf. They are too robust, they won’t listen, until they understand it about themselves, that it is a trait of their neurotype, a superpower in some contexts and a disability in others, and that they must factor their own neurotype into their thinking, that we all must disclose what we can of our own minds in order to clearly see the world.
May 17th., 2023