some kind of OCD?

So you're saying ADHD is more effective for non-adhd children than adhd children?

Well I don't have to wash my hands a lot. And it's not like these things go long term, usually just a few hours or days until it's...finished.

But during an overfocussed stretch, I'll often become oblivious to my surroundings and other obligations.

I included "focus" in the grouping of functionally identical words, which I think is important for perception. But the idea is the same. What prevents you from doing these tasks that, in a vacuum, you're physically and mentally capable of?

Let's say Bill ADHD has to do a 3-page school paper. Normally, he "can't" sit down and focus. But this time he's convinced that he will be given $1,000,000 (which'll help his poor/starving family) upon completion of the paper. My perception of the consensus is that many or most ADHD sufferers will now find this task sufficiently stimulating to improve their performance to non-disordered levels. How, then, can you say a lack of willpower and mental discipline isn't involved?

a paraplegic could probably crawl a mile if you offered him $1m

I went to a talk given by an educational neurologist (or something like that, she was marketed as an expert in the intersection between neurological pathways and learning styles, or something like that), and she posited that much of the issues we see are because American classrooms especially in elementary and middle schools are normed to attention spans consistent with the female population, while as many as 90% of boys in that age range almost literally can't sit still for that long. So a lot of what is colloquially known as ADHD is more accurately "being a pre-adolescent boy in an environment almost designed to make you unruly".

I may have the details somewhat muddled, since it was a year or so ago, but that's the general thrust.

ETA: this was in the context of a talk about how to make classrooms more friendly to "typical" male learning styles rather than any attempt to excuse the behaviors.

Seems like a silly example and the assumption doesn't accurately assess the difficulty imo

So would you say in other words you were:

A) Unable to pay enough attention to the talk to remember the details?
B) Too lazy and lacking in willpower to pay enough attention to remember the details?

I was going to say that a person might kill themselves for $1B to be distributed to their family but I like yours better.

SE FAQ, Liveblog & Tardness

bitches be crazy

ADHD is a fraud. Most every dumb upper-middle class kid in America is now programmed to blame their mediocrity on ADD and shovel pills down their throat at every opportunity. Meanwhile their horrible parents get to blame an 'illness' instead of their ****ty parenting.

Let me attempt to get more directly at what I've sort of been hinting at. I'm not just trying to call people with ADHD lazy. But what exempts one from moral culpability and not the other? Does the lazy person have any more control over the mental wiring and pathways that ultimately result in "lazy" actions than the ADHD person has control over the mental wiring and pathways that characterize him as an "ADHD sufferer?" Functionally, why should we view a 10-year-old with laziness in a separate moral category as a 10-year-old with ADHD?

To use Holliday's post: take the assumption that both the ADHD sufferer and the lazy person ultimately want to know and remember the details of the talk. Ultimately, why should we view (a) and (b) differently?

We generally buy into the notion of "free will", which is fine in that it's a fairly convenient assumption to make society run. We all have different brains, but if we're ultimately morally responsible for all our actions then at least the system is consistent.

But the idea and process of cordoning off a very specific subset of maladaptive mental characteristics -- and exempting only those from moral culpability -- highlights the problems with this overall view. Namely, that people without "disorders" are just as much a product of their brain and environment as people with them. The treatment may be different, but what's the moral implication of differing treatments? And what if the treatments aren't so different? ADHD pills tend to work for laziness, too.

Dear Victor,

You have received an infraction at Two Plus Two Poker Forums.

Reason: trolling in OOT
-------
trolling the amich thread in OOT
-------

This infraction is worth 25 point(s). Reaching a total of 100 points will result in a ban from the forums. Serious infractions may never expire.


Original Post:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/34.../#post37053739

lol

While I'm sure there are legitimate cases, I feel like it's usually parents who just want to give their kids pills so they'll sit down and shut up rather than taking the time to engage and stimulate their minds.

Sorry for clogging the thread, find this topic very philosophically interesting, but happy to let the threat move on to other places. Just in the interests of full disclosure: I was diagnosed with ADHD at ~16. I don't see myself as particularly "disordered" nor am I particularly concerned with whether I have "real ADHD" or "fake ADHD".

I take Vyvanse sporadically because it helps me focus on large projects or boring tasks with minimal side effect, but I didn't start taking until college and I did excellently in high school without it. A lot of my symptoms were or had been easily confused with laziness (procrastination, falling asleep in class, etc.) but, ultimately, I make no attempt at the impossible task of separating the two. I just don't like being bored.

I ultimately agree that, by far, the best solution is creating intellectually stimulating environments. This world being what it is, however...

(edit to add disclaimer: I appreciate that all of this topic is extremely complex and difficult to generalize, am generally trying to learn more and understand more about it, and I'm sure some of the generalizations cut corners or are simply inaccurate in some way. These are ideas that I'm still exploring rather than an ironclad worldview, and the last thing I intend is to imply judgment on anyone struggling with a mental illness or, really, any mental situation.)

In middle school I would fall asleep in every class despite being almost always interested in the material. I'm going for my PhD and it's basically a huge struggle for me not to pass out if the class is longer than :50 min.

The reason I'm railing against I being laziness is because I know that isn't the case for me. I literally can't work on something for more than 5 minutes at a time without doing something else in between regardless of how interesting it is, therefore needing to take numerous breaks.

i agree with man of the river

no one likes having to pay attention in class or do work. most of us just suck it up

Well no...but mostly yes.

Idk how people can even make it to :50!

And I was diagnosed with Tourette's (not the media portrayed swearing version which is like less than 5% of the actual cases, I had shoulder ticks until I was 10), ADHD depression and social anxiety - I actually had issues going to school as a kid in fear if what other people thought of me. I think being kids makes it worse because of the chemical makeup which contributes to the overdiagnoses, which is true in my case and is reflected in the literature.

lol @ this.

After growing up with my brother, it is inarguable that hyperactivity is a thing. It is also inarguable that his medication helped him.

But yeah, fraud.

You need to get your head on right dude.

The fact that Riverman went from ADHD to ADD in the same post with them being separate is amusing to me. I assume it's some sort of meta joke.