# Neurotypical Personality Disorder



## Ungweliante (Feb 26, 2009)

From this page: nt



> Modern science has now defined a formerly unknown neuro psychiatric disorder. For differentiatial diagnosis against ADHD/ADD/MCD, Asperger's and Tourette's, it is of utter importace having the following published, and information distributed to affected parents and patient-groups. The prognosis for individuals with this disorder is highly diverse. Some learn after adolesence to take care of themselves for shorter periods. Others are in constant need of company. Many succeed in the working life, preferrably in social professions, where they actually can turn their rigid fixation with each other into something prosperous. Diagnostic criteria for Neurotypical Personality Disorder, Pangloss-Pangloss rev. 2
> 1. Conformity: _(at least three of the following)_
> 
> 
> ...


Thoughts? Opinions? Comments? :happy:


----------



## DouglasMl (Nov 3, 2009)

Ungweliante said:


> From this page: nt
> 
> 
> 
> Thoughts? Opinions? Comments? :happy:


:laughing: I wonder if you have Autism or Asperger's syndrome among your personality quirks? There's nothing to be ashamed of if you do; I myself have Asperger's syndrome. (If indeed you do, please reply either in this thread or by private message; I just may be interested in befriending you.)

More to the point, I recognize and gently chuckle at how "neurological typicality" is meant to satirize the clinical terminology of the _Diagnostic and Statistical Manual_ of Psychiatric Disorders and its focus on negative deviations from normalcy.


----------



## Ungweliante (Feb 26, 2009)

DouglasMl said:


> :laughing: I wonder if you have Autism or Asperger's syndrome among your personality quirks? There's nothing to be ashamed of if you do; I myself have Asperger's syndrome. (If indeed you do, please reply either in this thread or by private message; I just may be interested in befriending you.)
> 
> More to the point, I recognize and gently chuckle at how "neurological typicality" is meant to satirize the clinical terminology of the _Diagnostic and Statistical Manual_ of Psychiatric Disorders and its focus on negative deviations from normalcy.


I have not been officially diagnosed with Asperger's. However, I tend to get quite high scores in online quizzes, e.g. Aspie Quiz: 149/200 Aspie, 65/200 neurotypical. I have been diagnosed with ADHD. My sister believes that I definitely don't have ADHD, but am most probably an Aspie. 

It's quite other matter, though, if there exist such a thing as Asperger's or ADHD as a formative factor in the individual brainchemistry...or if the categorizations are formed via certain psychological factors during childhood etc.

I find the "neurological typicality", as defined by the factors in the OP, a total ROFL :wink: The whole thing shows how psychology tends to use abstract words, and instill positive/negative meaning into them, largely without an ethical basis. The satire is spot-on. Instead, it would be far better to look into how certain types of behaviour are formed...and to use clear, definite terminology when describing them. E.g. ADHD = concentration problems and "misdirected attention" :happy:


----------



## Molock (Mar 10, 2010)

Is it bad that I know someone who fits that descriptions _perfectly_?

Hahaha :laughing:


----------



## DouglasMl (Nov 3, 2009)

Ungweliante said:


> From this page: nt
> 
> 
> 
> Thoughts? Opinions? Comments? :happy:


Consider yourself befriended, Ungweliante.

I just now thought of something: Have you ever gone to a psychiatrist for a full-scale diagnosis? I did, and was relieved to find out that I had Asperger's because the diagnosis made much of my life make sense. I strongly recommend that you do so, too.


----------



## timeless (Mar 20, 2010)

Fundamentally, the DSM is not an examination of the etiology of psychological phenomenon, but merely a catalog of typical symptoms as they match up to known disorders. It is merely of probative, not determinative, value in diagnosis. Generally speaking, psychologists are reluctant to ascribe a diagnosis to someone if that condition is not acting harmfully in their life. I don't think it presupposes negative or positive connotations because that kind of thing needs to be looked at in the context of the individual patient. (I went to school for clinical psychology :mellow


----------

