In article ,
.m   wrote:
>And FWIW, my personal feeling is that NTs may simply be on the very
>extreme end (so called 'High functioning') of a very broad and complex
>spectrum.  This is a more inclusive philosophy and intended to make
>understanding the 'typical' part easier.

The man who used to be my spiritual director certainly would have agreed
with you there.

There's a slight problem in that many of the less neurotypical people around
don't seem even to notice it in themselves.

I can usually pass for neurotypical when dealing with people face-to-face,
but it's a very tiring exercise, and I do less well when stressed.
-- 
+  Cris Galletly   +

On 03 Nov 2009 11:12:13 +0000 (GMT), Cris Galletly
 wrote:

>There's a slight problem in that many of the less neurotypical people around
>don't seem even to notice it in themselves.

That's why I like the idea of a very broad, all encompassing spectrum
with no fixed or easily identifyable points.  (It's also why I rather
dislike things like the AQ test.)

Understanding - or more appropriately, misunderstanding certain
reactions or thought processes can often be misinterpreted, which is
why I posed the original question - as I felt it applied here, in the
ongoing discussions.

As an aside, I do like the "High Functioning" bit - always better to
function whilst "High" - IMO, obviously :-)

In article ,
.m   wrote:
>Understanding - or more appropriately, misunderstanding certain
>reactions or thought processes can often be misinterpreted, which is
>why I posed the original question - as I felt it applied here, in the
>ongoing discussions.

Well, yes, it probably does.  But it happens in all of life, not just in
this newsgroup, and some bureaucrats, in particular, seem to have turned
it into an artform.  (Question: "How much are you going to deposit in
this account per annum?"  Real answer: "God alone knows, I don't have a
crystal ball to tell whether I'll be sacked next month or magically find
my perfect job."  Answer to get them to allow me to open it: "UKP X" (where
X was the minimum amount I was likely to deposit in it).)

>As an aside, I do like the "High Functioning" bit - always better to
>function whilst "High" - IMO, obviously :-)

Yes, remaining functioning whilst "High" sounds like a good plan ;-)
-- 
+  Cris Galletly   +