In any case I'd say that both "ADHD is just like hypertension and has nothing whatsoever to do with who I am as a person" and "ADHD is the only interesting thing about me" are both unnaturally extreme and nonsensical positions. ADHD impacts domains of life that are central to how people think about what matters about who they are. Forget…
In any case I'd say that both "ADHD is just like hypertension and has nothing whatsoever to do with who I am as a person" and "ADHD is the only interesting thing about me" are both unnaturally extreme and nonsensical positions. ADHD impacts domains of life that are central to how people think about what matters about who they are. Forget whether it's useful--I don't think it's possible for people to think about their mental conditions in just the way they think about hypertension or other medical problems that have nothing to do with how they think or act. Nor do I think it would be especially desirable or conducive to overall mental health to do so. It can actually be pretty destructive to externalize parts of your psyche in this way (but boy does our culture love externalizing parts of our psyches lately).
Didn't we kind of decide the opposite thing about depression, that reifying it as a very well-understood medical condition with a straightforward solution was both conceptually and practically problematic for people? In fairness I'd say the state of art re: ADHD is on marginally better theoretical footing, but still, the difference isn't radical.)
Do the people who have adopted the totalizing vision of ADHD seem particularly healthy, regarding their disorders? Are they healing better than someone who sees it as a challenge but not an aspect of their personality? Are they managing the disorder better?
Did you take me to be arguing for that totalizing vision anywhere? I explicitly disavowed it, and there's no expectation that I restate the case you've already made to you in my attempt to point to a more moderate position.
In any case I'd say that both "ADHD is just like hypertension and has nothing whatsoever to do with who I am as a person" and "ADHD is the only interesting thing about me" are both unnaturally extreme and nonsensical positions. ADHD impacts domains of life that are central to how people think about what matters about who they are. Forget whether it's useful--I don't think it's possible for people to think about their mental conditions in just the way they think about hypertension or other medical problems that have nothing to do with how they think or act. Nor do I think it would be especially desirable or conducive to overall mental health to do so. It can actually be pretty destructive to externalize parts of your psyche in this way (but boy does our culture love externalizing parts of our psyches lately).
Didn't we kind of decide the opposite thing about depression, that reifying it as a very well-understood medical condition with a straightforward solution was both conceptually and practically problematic for people? In fairness I'd say the state of art re: ADHD is on marginally better theoretical footing, but still, the difference isn't radical.)
Do the people who have adopted the totalizing vision of ADHD seem particularly healthy, regarding their disorders? Are they healing better than someone who sees it as a challenge but not an aspect of their personality? Are they managing the disorder better?
Did you take me to be arguing for that totalizing vision anywhere? I explicitly disavowed it, and there's no expectation that I restate the case you've already made to you in my attempt to point to a more moderate position.