So, not trying to step on any mines here, and I get this is literally only a 2D representation of a phenomenon.
But what jumps out to me, is how “neurodivergence” is being defined kind of ahistorically. It supposes that neuro divergence is an essential, natural quality in humanity. That has real problems when we try to describe objective reality, especially the parts of us that aren’t tangible.
Did ancient people mostly have 2 arms and legs, 10 fingers and toes at birth? Yeah, by all accounts. Were ancient people as intelligent as modern people? That question gets a little funky, because who and what gets defined as intelligent, is really historically and geographically dependent. European kings sent away to the most far flung monasteries to bring in trusted advisors who spoke multiple languages and could write awesome cursive; at the same time Fibonacci was bringing algebra and the foundations of calculus home from Turkiye and publishing them in Italy as brain teasers. Now cursive is worthless except as a craft, maybe some marketing, and calculus became the intellectual basis for the industrial revolution.
So if “neuro divergence” can be defined historically like intelligence, which in some ways the graph itself supports this claim, then we can’t rely on an idea of human nature to make a point, especially since we are talking about scientific medical detection of a concrete divergence or disorder.
So like, what is divergence? What is being diverged from? The baseline has always been a vibe.
I’ve read studies that show better outcomes, increased happiness, better social integration measured among children and students with autism who spent time working on farms around animals. Structured, satisfying, hands on work, that used to make up most of the population. Now farmers is a micro minority, either owning land and charging people to work it, or working land for not enough money – hard, degrading, difficult, exceedingly dangerous work.
Other factors like screen time, social media, increase in dietary simple sugars, all show measurable changes in behaviors of people with ADHD, social anxiety, autism, bipolar, borderline disorders. Academics like Michel Foucault have studied how mental health treatment and psychiatry (additionally schools, and hospitals) are directly descended from the development of mass imprisonment and incarceration during the industrial revolutions in England, France, Germany, etc.,
Foucault also reviews sources that show more kind and forgiving attitudes in society toward people with severe social dysfunctions and intellectual disabilities. I wouldn’t go nearly as far as saying that people with disorders and divergences were better off – I believe that the medieval monastery was a “safe” place for a lot of people with what might now be described as neuro divergent, but also acknowledge the medieval church exploited poverty and mental illness for official and unofficial purposes.
But it does raise the question of how people, who may be intellectually “equal,” when raised under different conditions develop quite differently. And the way our current system functions, it uses value judgments and certifications, etc., to slot me into a specific place. But once in that place, i have to almost be a certain kind of person in order to succeed. The role isn’t suited to the person filling it, but to the needs of the organization. And usually the org needs to make money.
If there is greater social stigma towards disorder and divergence than there once was, that plays a major factor in whether people even want to be diagnosed. Lots of people have commented on self identification with neuro divergence as being a “tik tok trend” or some such. But a friend of mine, in an unofficial obit she wrote for someone older, made a point to say that previous generations looked at MH like it meant you were off to meet the business end of an ice pick.
For myself, learning I have ADHD and treating it has been holistically helpful. I’m open about it with people, we will see if it bites me in the ass.
I just worry a bit about the framing of “people have always been this way.” While I agree it is true in a way; I think our society is extremely stressful and toxic.
And then to say that the baseline of neuro divergence is unchanged throughout time buys cover for people who are responsible for the environmental changes making people unwell, and getting richer because of it.
As a person who’s special interest is calligraphy, what do you mean by cursive? I had always thought that scripts were on a spectrum between gothic and cursive, with more strokes per letter or less strokes respectively. Though I mostly practice ornamental penmanship (fancy spencerian), so I don’t know much about the history of hands in Europe.
I guess I’m drawing a line between the late medieval period when there was accelerated social development of the EU, but not enough scribes and scholars, and so their work suddenly became very sought after in a new world made of contracts and written agreements. So I’m probably talking about arguably two different things. First when writing in a very formal manner was a literal sign of intelligence, because that kind of intellectual work became a necessary component of late pre-modern statecraft, and hence highly valued by the ruling classes of the time and place. The second connection is to cursive, which is a formalized writing that had real legal and business value just a few generations ago.
So I’m sure I am butchering the history of any actual scripts that were mentioned in this effort post. But as someone who has a pretty lively fascination with handwriting, font and text in general, I’d love any questions, clarifications, resources, criticisms and reprimands that are due!
Well I don’t think the vocabulary is particularly important here, since they likely didn’t use the words in the same way we do. Like some scripts like batard or English secretary hand were evolutions of the formal script that reduced pen strokes to be faster to write making them more cursive.
But I’m curious about the history of connected letter scripts like Italian round hand. But most of the books I’ve read about handwriting have been in the American tradition, and it helps they are easy to find on the Internet. Some cursory reading on the subject seems to point to it coming from Italy in the form of old Roman cursive. To my eyes old Roman cursive seems related but is too different for me to call a flowing connected letter script. This isn’t surprising though since it was used to write on wax tablets.
It seems like something we would recognize in the modern world as a connected letter cursive originated in the late 15th century Italy out of italic script. But I don’t speak Italian or Latin so I don’t know how to find any primary sources on this.
Italy is a fascinating region to study language, it was broken up into city states well into the 1800s, with some of those city states serving as the center of culture and intellectualism for all of Europe, at various times. So there was like these very advanced areas of Italy, and these very backwards parts, and the 1800s was all about getting people all speaking the same language, the Florentine dialect.
I bet if someone took on such a study it would be a very uninteresting read. Also Italians are friendly and speak good English I bet you could connect with someone who could help explore the topic more!
So, not trying to step on any mines here, and I get this is literally only a 2D representation of a phenomenon.
But what jumps out to me, is how “neurodivergence” is being defined kind of ahistorically. It supposes that neuro divergence is an essential, natural quality in humanity. That has real problems when we try to describe objective reality, especially the parts of us that aren’t tangible.
Did ancient people mostly have 2 arms and legs, 10 fingers and toes at birth? Yeah, by all accounts. Were ancient people as intelligent as modern people? That question gets a little funky, because who and what gets defined as intelligent, is really historically and geographically dependent. European kings sent away to the most far flung monasteries to bring in trusted advisors who spoke multiple languages and could write awesome cursive; at the same time Fibonacci was bringing algebra and the foundations of calculus home from Turkiye and publishing them in Italy as brain teasers. Now cursive is worthless except as a craft, maybe some marketing, and calculus became the intellectual basis for the industrial revolution.
So if “neuro divergence” can be defined historically like intelligence, which in some ways the graph itself supports this claim, then we can’t rely on an idea of human nature to make a point, especially since we are talking about scientific medical detection of a concrete divergence or disorder.
So like, what is divergence? What is being diverged from? The baseline has always been a vibe.
I’ve read studies that show better outcomes, increased happiness, better social integration measured among children and students with autism who spent time working on farms around animals. Structured, satisfying, hands on work, that used to make up most of the population. Now farmers is a micro minority, either owning land and charging people to work it, or working land for not enough money – hard, degrading, difficult, exceedingly dangerous work.
Other factors like screen time, social media, increase in dietary simple sugars, all show measurable changes in behaviors of people with ADHD, social anxiety, autism, bipolar, borderline disorders. Academics like Michel Foucault have studied how mental health treatment and psychiatry (additionally schools, and hospitals) are directly descended from the development of mass imprisonment and incarceration during the industrial revolutions in England, France, Germany, etc.,
Foucault also reviews sources that show more kind and forgiving attitudes in society toward people with severe social dysfunctions and intellectual disabilities. I wouldn’t go nearly as far as saying that people with disorders and divergences were better off – I believe that the medieval monastery was a “safe” place for a lot of people with what might now be described as neuro divergent, but also acknowledge the medieval church exploited poverty and mental illness for official and unofficial purposes.
But it does raise the question of how people, who may be intellectually “equal,” when raised under different conditions develop quite differently. And the way our current system functions, it uses value judgments and certifications, etc., to slot me into a specific place. But once in that place, i have to almost be a certain kind of person in order to succeed. The role isn’t suited to the person filling it, but to the needs of the organization. And usually the org needs to make money.
If there is greater social stigma towards disorder and divergence than there once was, that plays a major factor in whether people even want to be diagnosed. Lots of people have commented on self identification with neuro divergence as being a “tik tok trend” or some such. But a friend of mine, in an unofficial obit she wrote for someone older, made a point to say that previous generations looked at MH like it meant you were off to meet the business end of an ice pick.
For myself, learning I have ADHD and treating it has been holistically helpful. I’m open about it with people, we will see if it bites me in the ass.
I just worry a bit about the framing of “people have always been this way.” While I agree it is true in a way; I think our society is extremely stressful and toxic.
And then to say that the baseline of neuro divergence is unchanged throughout time buys cover for people who are responsible for the environmental changes making people unwell, and getting richer because of it.
As a person who’s special interest is calligraphy, what do you mean by cursive? I had always thought that scripts were on a spectrum between gothic and cursive, with more strokes per letter or less strokes respectively. Though I mostly practice ornamental penmanship (fancy spencerian), so I don’t know much about the history of hands in Europe.
I guess I’m drawing a line between the late medieval period when there was accelerated social development of the EU, but not enough scribes and scholars, and so their work suddenly became very sought after in a new world made of contracts and written agreements. So I’m probably talking about arguably two different things. First when writing in a very formal manner was a literal sign of intelligence, because that kind of intellectual work became a necessary component of late pre-modern statecraft, and hence highly valued by the ruling classes of the time and place. The second connection is to cursive, which is a formalized writing that had real legal and business value just a few generations ago.
So I’m sure I am butchering the history of any actual scripts that were mentioned in this effort post. But as someone who has a pretty lively fascination with handwriting, font and text in general, I’d love any questions, clarifications, resources, criticisms and reprimands that are due!
Well I don’t think the vocabulary is particularly important here, since they likely didn’t use the words in the same way we do. Like some scripts like batard or English secretary hand were evolutions of the formal script that reduced pen strokes to be faster to write making them more cursive.
But I’m curious about the history of connected letter scripts like Italian round hand. But most of the books I’ve read about handwriting have been in the American tradition, and it helps they are easy to find on the Internet. Some cursory reading on the subject seems to point to it coming from Italy in the form of old Roman cursive. To my eyes old Roman cursive seems related but is too different for me to call a flowing connected letter script. This isn’t surprising though since it was used to write on wax tablets.
It seems like something we would recognize in the modern world as a connected letter cursive originated in the late 15th century Italy out of italic script. But I don’t speak Italian or Latin so I don’t know how to find any primary sources on this.
Italy is a fascinating region to study language, it was broken up into city states well into the 1800s, with some of those city states serving as the center of culture and intellectualism for all of Europe, at various times. So there was like these very advanced areas of Italy, and these very backwards parts, and the 1800s was all about getting people all speaking the same language, the Florentine dialect.
I bet if someone took on such a study it would be a very uninteresting read. Also Italians are friendly and speak good English I bet you could connect with someone who could help explore the topic more!
I can answer all your questions here. Interested in talking live some time?