ADD Forums - Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Support and Information Resources Community  

Go Back   ADD Forums - Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Support and Information Resources Community > ADULTS AND ADD/ADHD > Adults with ADD > General ADD Talk
Register Blogs FAQ Chat Members List Calendar Donate Gallery Arcade Mark Forums Read

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-16-05, 03:05 PM
SB_UK SB_UK is offline
 
 

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: -
Posts: 21,098
Blog Entries: 20
Thanks: 6,176
Thanked 6,508 Times in 4,752 Posts
SB_UK has disabled reputation
Exclamation The Polymorphic Thread - Topic Changes with Each Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by sosninity
I lean more towards the concept of ADHDers having evolved for the new environment before others.
Hi sos,

That's exactly it though :-)

Increased availability of increased information.
Translation of the evolutionary drive to survive into its new form -- to accurately model reality.
Development of The ADDer mind with capacity to better model this new reality.
The ADDer mind as nothing more (!) than a capacity to form a logical framework for a richer encoding ie modelling of reality.

All in all though, just exactly what you've written, is it.

ie 'ADDers having evolved for the new environment'.

At some point - and I'm guessing fairly soon -- and I'm hoping fairly soon -- we'll crash past the current 'narrow' definition of ADD -- into a broader definition which'll have components of what you've just written factored in.

And no - not a thread killer at all :-) ... just a thread which carries the recurrent theme of 'disorder' vs 'more than a disorder' which appears to polarize opinion into irrationality, this itself, in turn, killing threads.

SB.
  #2  
Old 12-16-05, 08:12 PM
HighFunctioning's Avatar
HighFunctioning HighFunctioning is offline
Extradimensional Moderator
 

Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Not In Your Dimension
Posts: 3,866
Thanks: 339
Thanked 826 Times in 449 Posts
HighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally Posted by SB_UK
Hi sos,

That's exactly it though :-)

Increased availability of increased information.
Translation of the evolutionary drive to survive into its new form -- to accurately model reality.
Development of The ADDer mind with capacity to better model this new reality.
The ADDer mind as nothing more (!) than a capacity to form a logical framework for a richer encoding ie modelling of reality.

All in all though, just exactly what you've written, is it.

ie 'ADDers having evolved for the new environment'.

At some point - and I'm guessing fairly soon -- and I'm hoping fairly soon -- we'll crash past the current 'narrow' definition of ADD -- into a broader definition which'll have components of what you've just written factored in.

And no - not a thread killer at all :-) ... just a thread which carries the recurrent theme of 'disorder' vs 'more than a disorder' which appears to polarize opinion into irrationality, this itself, in turn, killing threads.

SB.
But is this capacity to form a logical framework an evolutionary compensation for ADD deficits? Is this skill present in some people, but a much higher percentage in the ADDer population (and a much higher percentage in the Autism population)? Sort of along the same lines that ADDers require higher IQ's in order to survive? How about creativity? Couldn't creativity be a survival skill (as in creativity in general, not directed to a specific activity)?

The other day, I was wondering as to why there are stark differences in some people's personality (no, I'm not going into a ADD vs. personality type argument), especially in conjunction with thinking styles.

It seems often that each person has strengths to balance their weaknesses. People who live in the realm of disconnected factual information tend to accept and reject information based on the source's reputation (in a hierarchal scheme). Is this because they have difficulty connecting the information like many of us do? Are the qualities of needing certainty (because the information isn't truely understood), being confident about knowedge (because knowledge is either right or wrong), and debunking speculative reasoning in favor of certain "factual" information (to increase "reputation" so that other similar thinkers look to them for information, which increases status, which increases certainty)? This is a cognitive type, along with some of the neccesary support mechanisms to support survival of the particular cognitive types.

There are other cognitive modalties, and each set of support mechanisms to ensure existence are different from one another.

I think we can almost throw away the question of whether or not ADD is a disorder, because we end up with at least one significant difference that needs to be adjusted for, whether or not ADD is a disorder (for disorder ~= Dictionary::malfunction, not Medical::disorder). Whether ADD is a cognitive type C[Type[ADD]], or ADD is a cognitive modifier (disorder) C'[X] = C[X] + M[ADD] + many other factors for X := Type[1]..Type[N]. Not that cognitive type can be boxed like that... but hopefully you see the point.

Compensation would be required in these instances, which would happen over time. I see being logical, speculative, and creative as advantages in the case of being ADD, but I'm not sure if it is an inherent part (at least, in terms that disorder = Medical::disorder and disorder != Dictionary::difference in this case).

I hope I didn't push this thread further off track.
__________________
Disclaimer: none of the posts on this forum should be taken as medical advice. Optimally, always seek the opinion of multiple experienced professionals, note any discrepancies, and use your best judgment, as well as research, to determine what is true, untrue, and neither (opinion).
  #3  
Old 12-17-05, 01:54 AM
meadd823's Avatar
meadd823 meadd823 is offline
Super Meowaderator
 

Join Date: May 2004
Location: address unknown
Posts: 20,896
Blog Entries: 38
Thanks: 6,854
Thanked 15,438 Times in 6,133 Posts
meadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
I hope I didn't push this thread further off track.
No but I found your algebraic analogy quit interesting. Judging by the grinding of my mental gears when I first ran across ADD explanatory possibilities in mathematical formula I need to check my transmission fluid (in my head as well as the car) .


I have always been viewed as an "odd ball" which bothered me when I was younger. I have grown to acceptance of my self with maturity. I find almost every person whom I have gotten to know personally has as many "odd ball" traits as I do.

In communication I think much of the difference is in perception. How we see our selves and how we think others see us. The other person has the same "formula" to deal with also. I believe that how we view ourselves has a lot of bearing upon how we present; which in turn has an effect on how we are perceived by others. I think too many people try to measure up to what they think other people are or want they think others want them to be.

Weather or not a particular social interaction is positive or negative depends greatly upon weather or not we are "mixing" with an environment that is suitable for us as people. Just like some chemicals do not mix well so some ADDers do not mix well in certain environments. Water mixes with a lot of things well however it does not mix well with every thing. Oil is a prime example of some thing that mixes poorly with water.

Just as we must determine weather or not mixing two chemicals is wise based upon their individual properties we must do the same for ourselves in social situations. Many of us are like water we mix well with a lot of different environments but NOT every environment. Personally I have found success in determining which types of environments suite me personally. I do not place a good/bad, right/wrong, normal/abnormal, judgment upon my social preferences.

I dis-like atmospheres where I must "be like every ones else". I do not like places where the people are incapable of being up front and honest. I don't enjoy the "keeping up with the Jones". I dislike head games but it isn't because I am unable to play them I am surprisingly well suited for them but find they are un-fun and usually destructive. Mind games are where the destructive portion of my ADD meets my creativity as it can be a lethal mix especially when I cloak it in goffy-ism!!!! I do not desire these things in my life so avoid them if at all possible. :soapbox: Only when threatened or cornered will I engage in such an encounter. Then I kick as* and leave!!!!

My friends are out going, plain spoken, accepting, and generally caring people. I don't have large circles of friends but a few very close ones as I prefer the rare gems in smaller quantities over imitations in abundance!!! This is me neither good nor evil, right or wrong, normal or abnormal just plain me period!!!
__________________


Follow ADDForums on Twitter & Facebook
Sponsored Links
  #4  
Old 12-17-05, 07:40 PM
SB_UK SB_UK is offline
 
 

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: -
Posts: 21,098
Blog Entries: 20
Thanks: 6,176
Thanked 6,508 Times in 4,752 Posts
SB_UK has disabled reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighFunctioning

But is this capacity to form a logical framework an evolutionary compensation for ADD deficits?

Is this skill present in some people, but a much higher percentage in the ADDer population (and a much higher percentage in the Autism population)?

Sort of along the same lines that ADDers require higher IQ's in order to survive?

How about creativity?

Couldn't creativity be a survival skill (as in creativity in general, not directed to a specific activity)?

It seems often that each person has strengths to balance their weaknesses. People who live in the realm of disconnected factual information tend to accept and reject information based on the source's reputation (in a hierarchal scheme). Is this because they have difficulty connecting the information like many of us do?

Are the qualities of needing certainty (because the information isn't truely understood), being confident about knowedge (because knowledge is either right or wrong), and debunking speculative reasoning in favor of certain "factual" information (to increase "reputation" so that other similar thinkers look to them for information, which increases status, which increases certainty)?
I arrayed your comments above - just to make things a little easier for me ... :-)

I guess that the logical framework and what it *permits*, is the driver behind its appearance and growth. I see what you mean, but don't think that we needed a true disordered feature, to drive the formation of this new logical structure -- as a kind of compensation.
So here A->B and not B->A.

Funny word skill. I think that it's maybe better to call it a mental modality ... but I'm not too sure why. I see it as a potentially incredibly complex interlinked structure which we all may form (ADDers) - a complete template, an incomplete template with richly defined sections, a complete template with complete and many richly defined sections......the differences between people (and ADDers) representing the extent to which the structure is filled (two structures - different forms for nonADDers and ADDers).
And the difference between ADDers and non-ADDers, as simply the form of the structure. ADDers potentially generating a more efficient and cross-linked structure, which directly impinges on many of the ADDer traits -- we see creativity explained using this model (and lots more) -- but I mention creativity here, solely because we hear so much talked about it, and yet no speculation on a mechanistic basis underlying it ... not any more though ... :-)
Creativity runs as one of the many positive characters that occurs and r-e-c-u-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-s -- it needs an explanation :-)
Magically mysterious, but I suspect that most of us here will not be surprised to see a stab at a demystification of creativity ... which I hope though retains its magical feel.

Autism does indeed come into the story, but enters as we introduce communication into the equation.
Imagine how much better things'd be, if 'I really knew you knew what I meant' ... :-) Of course that's a general comment that is relected back onto me, when you write ... and is simply a statement of how richer and closer modelling of reality might allow us many benefits -- including tighter communication.

Some have a vested interest in maintaining a status quo - in terms of 'the current thinking.' Some develop an overly emotional relationship to these ideas -- and criticism is taken personally. Though the way I see it is that if you imagine that structure, and imagine a rich encoding in just one quadrant -- and then threaten to destabilize that reality model - well, the reaction, is the reaction of an individual on a rug, as it is pulled from under their feet. The issues, we have minds --- and whether we like it or not, ADDers and nonADDers alike are driven by the need to model reality ... and there are difficult areas, and these are boxed with words like religion, faith, scientific evangelicism ... all chocolate boxes of beliefs which we convince ourselves are not -- to fill the gap -- the gaps that are inadequately modelled aspects of our reality.
The problem -- fix a solution - and it throws up a partition, which prevents extension - at least in some directions.

Perhaps the most misunderstood part of these ideas, is that they don't represent an inevitability -- and the mental modality, though potentially a tremendous leap forward - may not form without feeding (at least richly).

With IQ - I see it as an A->B and not a B->A as ABove :-), and creativity just falls out -- I've described this earlier on in this thread ... sliding over the canopy of a rain forest.

Heck - I think I've switched the order and interspersed my points throughout; when it comes to bullet pointing and making my points tally with those others - I have grown used to my numbering system and the other ... just not ADDing up.

SB.
  #5  
Old 12-18-05, 08:04 PM
SB_UK SB_UK is offline
 
 

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: -
Posts: 21,098
Blog Entries: 20
Thanks: 6,176
Thanked 6,508 Times in 4,752 Posts
SB_UK has disabled reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by meadd823
I dis-like atmospheres where I must "be like every ones else". I do not like places where the people are incapable of being up front and honest. I don't enjoy the "keeping up with the Jones". I dislike head games but it isn't because I am unable to play them I am surprisingly well suited for them but find they are un-fun and usually destructive.
In this new structure, I view the mind as taking back what's rightfully its own - and shifting the apparence of conscious control over the mind, back to where it belongs.
The mind as a more direct determinant of our mind-enriching activities or behaviour.
I view the mind as a reality simulation, model, structure ... and the mind (in the ADDer) as a more powerful, and happily less controllable entity.
The mind has an agenda -- and it is only through asserting conscious processes over the mind's agenda -- that we end up frittering away time in a manner that benefits us little -- but which ironically, in this thread, we might believe to be desirable - since it leads to a large component of that ADDer apparence of social ineptitude.

So -- why the paragraph above ... because what this all leads to is ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by meadd823
I dis-like atmospheres where I must "be like every ones else".

I do not like places where the people are incapable of being up front and honest.

I don't enjoy the "keeping up with the Jones". I dislike head games but it isn't because I am unable to play them I am surprisingly well suited for them but find they are un-fun and usually destructive.
The ADDer mind through its altered structure, generating a richer set of internal reality models ... more deeply cross-linked, and without the propensity towards pointless endeavours :-)

So Meadd, your last post is very ADD.
And HF -- have another look at your post -- there's something a little special about it, as it feels, when I read it, and re-read it ... :-)
that I had to switch away from linear thinking (into metamodel thinking) in order to grasp your shading.
What am I saying --- I think that you have posted a map of how you have thought about those last issues -- but your pattern of thought isn't 'straight' -- and yet makes perfect sense, when the reader accesses the thought space or approximate structure that you used to generate these ideas.

Maybe you know what I mean ... if so -- that's cool ... and has nothing to do with what I've just written :-)

SB.
  #6  
Old 12-18-05, 08:16 PM
SB_UK SB_UK is offline
 
 

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: -
Posts: 21,098
Blog Entries: 20
Thanks: 6,176
Thanked 6,508 Times in 4,752 Posts
SB_UK has disabled reputation
BTW the cure for eternal boredom is simple - give over to whatever your mind tells you it wants -- drop the reigns -- it feels kinda' like soaring.
And the feelings in this state of mind ...
you know the ADDer observation of giving over to auto-pilot, accomplishing loads ... and not so able to remember what went on in that time ... :-)
And ... don't worry about the memory thing -- what you need to remember -- you will ....

it's just a case of ... the mind taking what it needs, and nothing more ... :-)

SB.
  #7  
Old 12-18-05, 09:23 PM
meadd823's Avatar
meadd823 meadd823 is offline
Super Meowaderator
 

Join Date: May 2004
Location: address unknown
Posts: 20,896
Blog Entries: 38
Thanks: 6,854
Thanked 15,438 Times in 6,133 Posts
meadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
propensity towards pointless endeavours
Maybe why ADDers dis-like washing dishes, ideal chit chat or any activity void of novelty or fun!!!!!!
__________________


Follow ADDForums on Twitter & Facebook
  #8  
Old 12-19-05, 04:45 AM
SB_UK SB_UK is offline
 
 

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: -
Posts: 21,098
Blog Entries: 20
Thanks: 6,176
Thanked 6,508 Times in 4,752 Posts
SB_UK has disabled reputation
Exactly :-)
And funnily enough - I think I suggested - around a couple of years ago here -- that we try to understand 'fun' :-)
I think in the 'ABF' thread.
I believe that fun and novelty describes a large part of the ADD experience -- for exactly the reason just given -- novelty allowing the mind to develop models in previously empty mind space -- the drive and feeling as this occurs -- being nice... in fact --> fun :-) ... and all of this placing us as perpetual fun seekers -- but where fun -- itself -- has a very real point to it.
So nobody regardless of ADD - wants to be bored -- we 're simply shaped with a mind that defines a lower threshold for boredom - ADD as eternally moderately bored :-) ... until we see all of this ... and then ADD becomes something quite different.

SB.
  #9  
Old 12-19-05, 03:43 PM
HighFunctioning's Avatar
HighFunctioning HighFunctioning is offline
Extradimensional Moderator
 

Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Not In Your Dimension
Posts: 3,866
Thanks: 339
Thanked 826 Times in 449 Posts
HighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally Posted by SB_UK
Exactly :-)
I believe that fun and novelty describes a large part of the ADD experience -- for exactly the reason just given -- novelty allowing the mind to develop models in previously empty mind space -- the drive and feeling as this occurs -- being nice... in fact --> fun :-) ... and all of this placing us as perpetual fun seekers -- but where fun -- itself -- has a very real point to it.
That point being, basically, what enables us to function properly... (internal stimulation resulting from external events)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SB_UK
So nobody regardless of ADD - wants to be bored -- we 're simply shaped with a mind that defines a lower threshold for boredom - ADD as eternally moderately bored :-) ... until we see all of this ... and then ADD becomes something quite different.
Fun isn't as much of a requirement for them as it is for us. In most situations, it doesn't seem to be a requirement at all for them. Certainty and security are much more important, especially if it is only fun that must be sacrificed.

Really, the interests of the majority of people usually do not include intellectual tasks. If someone told me, I probably wouldn't be suprised to hear that most people pick a career path out of a stack of cards, persue a higher education "just because", and mindlessly do their duty. Boring doesn't really bother them. Excitement is like desert to them. They only have it once in a while so that the next time they have it, it is just as pleasureable as the last time. Otherwise, they'd be "spoiled", as one's grandmother may say.

But, *is* that another trait that can facilitate an ADDer's survival? Having interests that are more productive than watching sports on television? If we need to have fun, wouldn't it be nice if those fun things to do overlapped with productive things as well?
__________________
Disclaimer: none of the posts on this forum should be taken as medical advice. Optimally, always seek the opinion of multiple experienced professionals, note any discrepancies, and use your best judgment, as well as research, to determine what is true, untrue, and neither (opinion).
  #10  
Old 12-19-05, 04:31 PM
SB_UK SB_UK is offline
 
 

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: -
Posts: 21,098
Blog Entries: 20
Thanks: 6,176
Thanked 6,508 Times in 4,752 Posts
SB_UK has disabled reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighFunctioning
But, *is* that another trait that can facilitate an ADDer's survival? Having interests that are more productive than watching sports on television? If we need to have fun, wouldn't it be nice if those fun things to do overlapped with productive things as well?
Here's the cool bit though -- for the nonADDer intellectual tasks as work, fun as hedonistic pleasure and work and not fun being associated with productivity.

I believe that many ADDers will raise an eyebrow to this idea of always on intellectuals -- but jump the stigma - and answer this question -- what do we find fun?

And similarly - skip the nonAdder definition of fun -- and we have two re-engineered ideas -- where, now, fun/productivity/intellectual pursuits and 'work' converge -- where before they were forced apart.

SB.
  #11  
Old 12-19-05, 07:11 PM
HighFunctioning's Avatar
HighFunctioning HighFunctioning is offline
Extradimensional Moderator
 

Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Not In Your Dimension
Posts: 3,866
Thanks: 339
Thanked 826 Times in 449 Posts
HighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally Posted by SB_UK
Here's the cool bit though -- for the nonADDer intellectual tasks as work, fun as hedonistic pleasure and work and not fun being associated with productivity.

I believe that many ADDers will raise an eyebrow to this idea of always on intellectuals -- but jump the stigma - and answer this question -- what do we find fun?

And similarly - skip the nonAdder definition of fun -- and we have two re-engineered ideas -- where, now, fun/productivity/intellectual pursuits and 'work' converge -- where before they were forced apart.
Well, I wasn't trying to place a direct link between ADD and intellectualism. I was just stating that I think intellectual ADDers are in a better position in life than non-intellectual ADDers. An ADDer is going to be attracted to what stimulates the ADDer, intellectual or not.

To most people, productivity (work acomplished) tends to be related (at least, in my tiny chunk of experience) to how long one performed work. The harder and more repetitive the work is, the more one percieves as being acomplished. Productivity is fairly certain. If one works for X amount of time, there's a good chance that at least Y amount of work is done. Veering off into the path of optimization (traveling the rough, dangerous country) or anything else that is not certain (if it's not certain, it's not a part of the task) is wasting time (screwing around). Veering off into something that is totally unrelated is screwing around, squared.

To me, productivity is how much work actually gets acomplished, not necessarily how hard or boring it was doing it. To some people, the definition of work is something that is hard and/or boring, and if it's not at least one of those, well, it's not actually work. As far as work is concerned, there's more than one way to do it, just like in Perl. Work *can* be made to be fun, provided that you are using an appropriate definition of "work". It all depends on what alternative, exciting method (programming is a good example, especially as it can scale quickly) is available that takes advantage of one's interests/intellectual pursuits.
__________________
Disclaimer: none of the posts on this forum should be taken as medical advice. Optimally, always seek the opinion of multiple experienced professionals, note any discrepancies, and use your best judgment, as well as research, to determine what is true, untrue, and neither (opinion).
  #12  
Old 12-19-05, 08:10 PM
SB_UK SB_UK is offline
 
 

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: -
Posts: 21,098
Blog Entries: 20
Thanks: 6,176
Thanked 6,508 Times in 4,752 Posts
SB_UK has disabled reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighFunctioning
Well, I wasn't trying to place a direct link between ADD and intellectualism.

To most people, productivity (work acomplished) tends to be related (at least, in my tiny chunk of experience) to how long one performed work. Veering off into something that is totally unrelated is screwing around, squared.
To me, productivity is how much work actually gets acomplished, not necessarily how hard or boring it was doing it.
As far as work is concerned, there's more than one way to do it, just like in Perl. Work *can* be made to be fun, provided that you are using an appropriate definition of "work". It all depends on what alternative, exciting method (programming is a good example, especially as it can scale quickly) is available that takes advantage of one's interests/intellectual pursuits.
Apologies for the first point - my point being that I -am- saying that :-) ... but that there's a stigma associated with making that statement - and so as long as that's true - it's maybe easier not to phrase it in that way - but instead just to try and acknowledge that there's some sort of cerebral kick that we can get, that's fun -- that drives us particularly - and which, in a world in which the word 'intellectual' -- doesn't carry unwanted baggage -- it'll be nice to re-introduce, into context alongside ADD.

The intellectual ADDer.

And yes -- actively seeking alternative solutions -- so, for example seizing awk and sed, and emacs lisp --- for tasks that can be accomplished by perl -- surefire way to make text parsing or scripting -- just that little bit more -fun- :-)
Awk and sed, forming the historical perspective to Perl -- which is nice to learn and Emacs -- taking us into honest development environments.

More than one way to do things in Perl ... and now, whenever, ... I try and jump out of comfort in a targetted direction -- not randomly -- but with the express goal of being taken into other areas, which I hope will be beneficial.

I wonder whether we can text p.a.r.s.e. in Assembly :-)
Are we on for more binary ASCII art?

:-)

SB.
  #13  
Old 12-21-05, 11:35 PM
HighFunctioning's Avatar
HighFunctioning HighFunctioning is offline
Extradimensional Moderator
 

Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Not In Your Dimension
Posts: 3,866
Thanks: 339
Thanked 826 Times in 449 Posts
HighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally Posted by SB_UK
I wonder whether we can text p.a.r.s.e. in Assembly :-)
I suppose as long as we can write shell scripts that act as web servers, anything is possible. It's usually fun to test the limits of a language.

(Definately possible, but how many can endure the battle (especially without cheating (i.e. using a macro assembler))?)
__________________
Disclaimer: none of the posts on this forum should be taken as medical advice. Optimally, always seek the opinion of multiple experienced professionals, note any discrepancies, and use your best judgment, as well as research, to determine what is true, untrue, and neither (opinion).

Last edited by HighFunctioning; 12-21-05 at 11:55 PM..
  #14  
Old 12-22-05, 08:31 PM
SB_UK SB_UK is offline
 
 

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: -
Posts: 21,098
Blog Entries: 20
Thanks: 6,176
Thanked 6,508 Times in 4,752 Posts
SB_UK has disabled reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by HF
It's usually fun to test the limits of a language.

Well, yes. But, isn't ADD a disorder (per medical standards) that is also believed to be brain-based? If it is brain-based, wouldn't it make sense to identify those brain-based differences that cause ADD ...
A programming language - any communicative language -- words maybe, but the rest too ... are potentially usable by ADDers in a different manner ... continuing on from around 4 or 5 threads in this part of the forum ... the ADDer perspective is for linkage between aspects of the mind ... in a trained mind ... which is the mechanistic basis underlying creativity.
And surely enough that creativity is observed in ...
A programming language - any communicative language -- words maybe, but the rest too ...

ADD basis:true[research] vs ADD basis:not false[medical definition of disorder] is an important debate.
Sure enough the ADDer brain has something or some things which we can point to, but which are several stages removed from their manifestation as a disordered state.
Environment washes over the transition from pure aetiology to disordered external appearance.
So, ADD basis:[research], at least in relation to aetiology, is the subject that we should concentrate on - rather than ADD basis:[medical definition of ADHD as a disorder] ... if the goal is understanding. In the absence of ADD basis:[research], however, ADD basis:[medical] surrogates sufficiently to deal with the pressing needs of those that are suffering most greatly - and need assistance.

However ... what if it were to be shown that ADDers (basis:[research]) could benefit as greatly as ADDers (basis:[medical]) from stimulants ...
I am sure that this will be the case.

And it sure puts the cats amongst the pigeons -- because it now appears as though I'm advocating the usage of amphetamines to individuals with no discernible disorder.

This stand-point is borne through a different view on how stimulant drugs operate in DopaNet ... and invalidates the all too popular theories about redressing dopamine sensitivities in specific neuroanatomic locales.

At least to me, it doesn't seem right, that a molecule with the ubiquity of dopamine throughout the brain ... and with a 'weakness' only in 1 or a small number of parts of the brain, especially a 'weakness' which involves the exquisite complexity of neuronal meshworks and neurotransmission ... could somehow be specifically and effectively treated by the process of swamping the brain in a solution of amphetamine.

Doesn't the existing theory, although initially appearing sensible ... soon become overtaken by incredulity ... this disbelief relating to the postulate that a sledgehammer solution could be applied successfully to a problem, which is believed to be spawned by a delicate imbalance in neuromodulation.
How come this delicacy doesn't entail that we have to deliver very specific amounts of dopaminergic compounds icv, to different and specific parts of the brain -- regulated in a dynamic manner, on the basis of the mental gymnastics that we are involved in ... to treat ADD?

I published a paper in 'Nature' over 10 years ago on strategies for solving normally distributed phenotypes ... they exist ... for sure, but they're not going to be of a whole lotta' use in this current debate.

SB.
  #15  
Old 12-22-05, 09:51 PM
HighFunctioning's Avatar
HighFunctioning HighFunctioning is offline
Extradimensional Moderator
 

Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Not In Your Dimension
Posts: 3,866
Thanks: 339
Thanked 826 Times in 449 Posts
HighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant futureHighFunctioning has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally Posted by SB_UK
So, ADD basis:[research], at least in relation to aetiology, is the subject that we should concentrate on - rather than ADD basis:[medical definition of ADHD as a disorder] ... if the goal is understanding. In the absence of ADD basis:[research], however, ADD basis:[medical] surrogates sufficiently to deal with the pressing needs of those that are suffering most greatly - and need assistance.
As of right now, actually looking at the aetiology for diagnostic purposes is unrealistic, but that doesn't mean that it should be ignored or is invalid. I agree in that it should be the primary focus in "finding the truth."

Quote:
However ... what if it were to be shown that ADDers (basis:[research]) could benefit as greatly as ADDers (basis:[medical]) from stimulants ...
I am sure that this will be the case.
Determining and fixing a problem in a motor vehicle is generally more effective than randomly swaping parts, even if we have data that says X behavior is caused by Y problem, and Z or W is the solution.

Quote:
And it sure puts the cats amongst the pigeons -- because it now appears as though I'm advocating the usage of amphetamines to individuals with no discernible disorder.
But aren't we treating an issue, not a disorder? The issue is what is observed to be the problem at a fundamental level. Disorder is assuming that something is going on due to a colletion of symptoms. We should be treating actual issues, not generalized labels.


Quote:
At least to me, it doesn't seem right, that a molecule with the ubiquity of dopamine throughout the brain ... and with a 'weakness' only in 1 or a small number of parts of the brain, especially a 'weakness' which involves the exquisite complexity of neuronal meshworks and neurotransmission ... could somehow be specifically and effectively treated by the process of swamping the brain in a solution of amphetamine.

Doesn't the existing theory, although initially appearing sensible ... soon become overtaken by incredulity ... this disbelief relating to the postulate that a sledgehammer solution could be applied successfully to a problem, which is believed to be spawned by a delicate imbalance in neuromodulation.
How come this delicacy doesn't entail that we have to deliver very specific amounts of dopaminergic compounds icv, to different and specific parts of the brain -- regulated in a dynamic manner, on the basis of the mental gymnastics that we are involved in ... to treat ADD?
Pieces of observable experience, like the fact that this "sledgehammer" solution just so happens to "work", are helpful to narrowing down the problem, but they don't actually define or imply the problem itself, they simply point to the general direction. As we acquire more "factual" information (data, in a sense), the possibilities as to the solution lessen. In theory, it should be possible to narrow the problem down enough where we can make an accurate determination as to the causation, with enough data, sort of on the same principle of Xeno's paradox. In practice though, I think the sheer number of possibilities and the effort required collect "data" at a deep enough level to determine causation is not feasable, unless you accept an answer that is "good enough."

I don't know. Maybe this response had nothing to do with what you just said. I can't remember...
__________________
Disclaimer: none of the posts on this forum should be taken as medical advice. Optimally, always seek the opinion of multiple experienced professionals, note any discrepancies, and use your best judgment, as well as research, to determine what is true, untrue, and neither (opinion).
Closed Thread

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
cant post a new thread yupyup1128 Forums Help, Q&A 2 04-24-05 12:36 AM
can't post in chat thread......... fasttalkingmom Chit-Chat 0 02-02-05 09:16 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) 2003 - 2015 ADD Forums