Examples of Neurodivergence from real Life

[Cred]

5 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

How are you differentiating inherent neuro divergent behaviours (nature) from external incentive / conditioning structures (nurture)?

Fantastic question!

This is my take about that currently: The omnimodal noetic (OMN) model describes the genetic conditions for your personally preferred mode of being. So if your noetic profile consists of 0% of one of these, you cannot be nurtured into engaging with that mode of being.

One can be nurtured into living a life that is not in alignment with their genetic noetic profile. Just like people here are being nurtured into doing pickup. This is especially the case for asemionoetic people (non conformists) like us, because nurture itself is a very semionoetic process. (Gotcha)

(I can imagine that all mental disorders trace back to a misalignment with the respective noetic profile. But I know this is a big claim.)

This means that you can't measure the noetic profile of a person by examining their behavior. (they are doing pickup? Surely they are semionoetic!). Each individual has to at least partly figure out its noetic profile by themselves, since only they know what mode of existence they value. But it is a lot easier when they know about OMN.

Edited Monday at 01:00 PM by Cred

[oOo]

Neurodivergence is interesting and spans different categories, with human neurodivergence differentiated from divergence at a species level, and with particulars across both cognitive, psychological and emotional dimensions, which also span various forms of psychism to telepathy. For this comment, I will reserve comment to neurodivergence through the lens of cognitive ideational divergence and imaginative absorption capability. These two tend to overlap with openness to experience (big 5 personality) which tends to cover its two hefty correlated qualities of lower levels of latent inhibition and dopaminergic functioning at the broader level.

At scale neurodivergence presents communication across species, where closer similarities like those we share uniquely with dogs compared to cats, create localised potential for communication and outside that, unbreakable parameters of distance. Unsurprisingly, as we zoom in at the human population level, the same pattern emerges, where the “size of thee galaxy matters” significantly especially as it pertains to ability. People with more intelligence and creativity than those with less, the greater the gap is the more they are viewed with the same sense of mystery as stars in the sky, where often, those same people if they do not find the right circles can find themselves as just as lonely, with many generating various forms of psychological coping mechanisms with a sense of “specialness” being one of them. These are just correlations however, awareness often becomes the greatest mediator in a ballroom dance floor to move around correlations and establish one’s own unique track, however from birth inside of a societal system that was built for the mean of sustainability, the average and what worked for the economy, unless you grow up in a privileged family environment where the likelihood of being given a gifted route to prosper, it is likely going to be a long road to salvation however talented you happen to be. The ironic “specialness” then of neurodivergence is not special at all, as you have many more hurdles to jump over and societal traps to avoid as a cost of diverging from the genetic pack.

Genetic anomalies are one thing, then we have those that are purpose built epigenetically, such as the many neural adaptations that are correlated with the right improvements in the areas I have cited through specialised psychedelic use. This unique example presents a very stark before and after reality that serves as an interesting case study even purely through the lens of the experiencer themselves and how they awaken new ways of biographical and life reflection. Psychedelics are not the only way, neurodivergence can be seen in other forms of positive and negative examples depending on the lens, from David Goggins to your average far and overweight American who’s brain first began to alter its chemistry only after 3 days of eating mc Donald’s to now 3 years later where underneath an fMRI it looks as though you’re looking at something that better resembles Mc Donald’s logo with Mc Donald’s television commercials than it does a human brain. Western societies fascination and subsequent case studies of various kinds of neurodivergence will continue to push the boundaries of of what is epigenetically possible, where psychedelics are used as a snapshot on creative pharmacological outgrowths.

Often, neurodivergence is the antithesis to the thesis of the environment coming together for healthy cultural divergence. Our ecosystem then, like natural evolutionary adaptations, requires just as much, anomalous ways of browsing the internet of life and formulating new connections to share on the Facebook of one’s closest social environment. At the surface level, this looks fine and dandy, however the benefit of divergence as already stated depends on where it fits within the gears of the pre-existing systems it’s a part of. Neurodivergence in a time of war that doesn’t serve it’s adaptation, which in many ways it can depending on your outfit and respective divergence, becomes the very anomaly that is singled out and purpose ostracised, whereas during a time of entrepreneurial expansion, where one is less having to will themselves up a corporate ass pipe, doors don’t only swing open, you can make your own.

So no matter who are what kind of neurodivergence you have, my best advice is self acceptance first and foremost followed by assessing the benefit you have of likely coming from a first rather than third world country to engender yourself with the gratitude that you can make a meaningful difference to your life with a far greater degree of freedom. The next is prioritising the clearing out of any “specialness” syndrome while at the same time the importance of understanding your differences at the practical level so you can make sensible social choices. This often accompanies housekeeping on any pre-existing trauma that usually carries as I stated that kind of compensatory baggage. 

There are many intelligent, creative and high consciousness people in the world, and our job isn’t to compare ourselves to them but to understand where it matters how we can work together to better carve through the edges of normality and play our role in expanding the cultural horizons of our respective creative and social evolutionary ecosystem.

Edited Monday at 03:07 PM by oOo

[Cred]

3 hours ago, Basman said:

This all just sounds like the autistic trait of lacking natural emotional insight into people and context.

Nice to see you're still here!🙃

If what I say is so unsignificant, then why are you still reading and engaging with my posts?😂

Edited Monday at 03:51 PM by Cred

[Basman]

3 hours ago, Cred said:

Nice to see you're still here!🙃

If what I say is so unsignificant, then why are you still reading and engaging with my posts?😂

Bro, who cares? 

I engage because I have something to say.

[Yimpa]

21 hours ago, Hojo said:

@Yimpa if you were my friend irl I'd make you a Christmas card of Jesus hugging you.

Truth is, I have no friends and I am all alone.  

[Natasha Tori Maru]

10 hours ago, Cred said:

Fantastic question!

This is my take about that currently: The omnimodal noetic (OMN) model describes the genetic conditions for your personally preferred mode of being. So if your noetic profile consists of 0% of one of these, you cannot be nurtured into engaging with that mode of being.

One can be nurtured into living a life that is not in alignment with their genetic noetic profile. Just like people here are being nurtured into doing pickup. This is especially the case for asemionoetic people (non conformists) like us, because nurture itself is a very semionoetic process. (Gotcha)

(I can imagine that all mental disorders trace back to a misalignment with the respective noetic profile. But I know this is a big claim.)

This means that you can't measure the noetic profile of a person by examining their behavior. (they are doing pickup? Surely they are semionoetic!). Each individual has to at least partly figure out its noetic profile by themselves, since only they know what mode of existence they value. But it is a lot easier when they know about OMN.

I am very much struggling to get through the verbiage with this one. 

It did not clarify much for me.

[Cred]

1 hour ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

It did not clarify much for me.

Yeah, this is totally understandable.

When I wrote that answer, I assumend that I would post an explaination of my model with many examples afterwards to make clarify on the language😅

But it turns out, building a robust theory, inventing terms and defining them takes a lot more time that I thought.

[oOo]

@Cred only having just read the broader thread, this feels like a genuinely useful ontological slice.

The way I’m reading it, you’re circling stable attractor states, so differences in internal generative architectures that foreground very different “worlds,” and then quietly bias what each system experiences as real, salient, or even worth searching for in the first place.

Alongside the correlates you’re already tracking, there also seem to be more intrinsic attractor tendencies in play, things like openness to experience and latent inhibition (as I mentioned earlier), as well as dopaminergic tone and inhibitory control. Not as explanations of the foreground itself, but as parameters that make certain attractors easier to fall into and harder to leave. Big Five–style traits feel downstream here: they don’t define the world, but they clearly tilt the terrain.

The only place I’d tread lightly is in letting correlates harden into essences. Very different bottom-up stories, autism, trauma, prolonged social masking, developmental canalization, pharmacological or psychedelic perturbation, can converge on remarkably similar foregrounds while having almost nothing in common under the hood. Psychedelics are a particularly loud reminder that “0% access” is dangerous language (as I noted in my first response); the foreground can reconfigure dramatically without implying the prior mode was ever ontologically sealed off.

My hunch is that if you keep pushing bottom-up and stay curious about where adjacent theories refuse to line up cleanly, you’ll keep uncovering new structure, and won’t need to invoke “the map is not the territory” as a ritual disclaimer after the fact.

That’s my compressed view on a brief afternoon break before heading back to my work.

[oOo]

@Cred To add to my comment (third) directly above, after having read a bit more of your writing, I want to add a constructive challenge that I think sharpens the theory.

In 50 words or less, what additional explanatory structure are you positing beyond (a) shared phenomenological clusters and (b) the epistemic point that behavior won’t reliably reveal profile?

My move directly above after-all goes one level deeper by treating what you’re calling “modes” as stabilized trajectories of multiplicative convergence within an attractor landscape, where distinct genetic routing and epigenetic re-routing pathways repeatedly renew the same foreground.

If you’re instead claiming irreducible genetic kinds rather than process-defined identities, I’m curious what would falsify that. Either way, the aim is refinement, not opposition. It’s good to see an example of this kind of theoretical exploration the forum could have more fun with, even if pure experimentation is the pastime.

[Cred]

@oOo I will post my unfished notes about ontomodal theory of the absolute (wip name) within the next hours so you and other people on this forum can properly engage with my thoughts.

I will answer to your replies soon but I want to get this out first

[Cred]

8 hours ago, oOo said:

“the map is not the territory”

First, thanks a lot for the input!

The theory of ontomodality seems to be extremely epistemologically robust.

It even transcends the statement above.

"the map" exists in a hyloexo-semiosynconic mode, while "the territory" is either a hyloexonic, phenoendonic, or hybrid mode of existence depending on context (on this forum it is likely used as hybrid or pheno'). This means that hyloexo-semiosynconic beings are modally aligned with the map, meaning to them "the map" is existence. On the contrast, to people who are hylo', pheno' or hylo'-pheno', "the terretory" is existence.

In short, my model claims, that the territory has no ontological dominance over the map.

If the language is hard to understand, read my post about ontomodality

Edited 16 hours ago by Cred

[oOo]

@Cred I follow the reclassification, however that said, it doesn’t yet answer the generative question I posed. Declaring “no dominance” is a semantic equalization; what matters is the dynamics that make one foreground self-stabilizing for a system. In other words, map/territory aren’t rival ontologies, rather they’re rival attractor solutions to different regulation problems.

What would falsify “irreducible genetic kinds” versus cost/attractor convergence?

[Cred]

Sorry I didn't mention this: The notion of irreversible genetic essence is very limited of course. I had a thought about epigenetics while building the model myself, but it isn't in my priority to worry about such details yet. I'm more interested about developing the bigger picture to be able to see as early as possible how it might break.

I'm very thankful for your contributions. However it might take me some time to integrate this into my model since I'm more of a generalist (holoconic) and not as much of a specialist (hyloexonic)

Edited 15 hours ago by Cred

[oOo]

@Cred Cheers and no probs, what I was pointing at isn’t an added detail, rather a change in how the model behaves once convergence is allowed. If similar experiential patterns can arise through different routes (genetic, epigenetic, developmental, pharmacological), then what’s being described functions less like fixed modes and more like recurring process outcomes shaped by stability and cost. That distinction matters for how the larger picture holds together. No urgency to integrate, just wanted that implication visible.