Because this is a technical article with nonstandard jargon, I'm going to state the most important piece of tacit knowledge that I know psychology professionals have but do not communicate to laymen (I personally came across it somewhere when reading the complete works of Eric Berne, but I can't recall exactly where).
Any apparent disorder in a person or persons has to be decomposed into the innate parts that existed prior to birth and the environmental experiences that happened afterwards as a prerequisite for any kind of theorising to give useful results instead of noise. They call this the diathesis-stress model and it's easily overlooked.
Not necessarily. Diathesis is a broader term that includes congenital aspects, maternal stressors and various toxin exposures, among other things.
For example, restricting the range of discourse to the purely congenital excludes things like fetal alcohol syndrome, the ages of both parent's gametes and pre-natal exposure to endocrine disruptors. However, in everyday usage, the diathesis refers primarily to those of the symptoms in the physiology, psychology and behavior of the subject that aren't attributable to life experiences (good and bad) rather than the microbiology specifics that act as carriers for any specific cause.
What's important above all else for the psychiatric practice is effective decomposition of any disease into parts that are amenable to study and treatment, rather than comparison to the hypothetical of what kind of "peak" may be achievable for a specific genotype if everything else went well.
Disorders are not diseases.
Also, there has been identified genetical component for people with disorders, so the course here is to dismiss any congenital factors that people so far jump on assumption to cause these and it seems that you have the same direction of thinking.
I have read some books about Darwin evolution and to me the new fact was that some fish while are being recognized as the same species are actually acting like different species diverged based on their diet and behaviour - those fishes that had mainly carnivorous behaviour diverged from rest of those that had more plant based food. And they are on a path of becoming species.
Microbiology and other things with chemistry simply would not help with anything here, as the main object of their differences is in the way how their brains are working - why with equally equipped "tools" they behave differently and that eventually lead to their evolution to different species. This is applicable to neurodivergent people - we are diverging into different species, though because we still have sex with each other that affects whole humanity. Nothing to do with environment effects, that you are offering as a cause - I do eat the same products, but I look on world differently, apparently more wiser than average human, but that comes at the cost of making social connections, because essentially as a new species we are aliens among humans, but eventually there will be further adaptions, that will make us better at connections and who knows maybe even better than how humans are able to connect with each other. It is just how human evolution works.
OgsyedIE · · focus · HN ↗
Any apparent disorder in a person or persons has to be decomposed into the innate parts that existed prior to birth and the environmental experiences that happened afterwards as a prerequisite for any kind of theorising to give useful results instead of noise. They call this the diathesis-stress model and it's easily overlooked.
boplicity · · focus · HN ↗
What does this mean? Do you mean the congenital aspects of a disorder?
OgsyedIE · · focus · HN ↗
For example, restricting the range of discourse to the purely congenital excludes things like fetal alcohol syndrome, the ages of both parent's gametes and pre-natal exposure to endocrine disruptors. However, in everyday usage, the diathesis refers primarily to those of the symptoms in the physiology, psychology and behavior of the subject that aren't attributable to life experiences (good and bad) rather than the microbiology specifics that act as carriers for any specific cause.
What's important above all else for the psychiatric practice is effective decomposition of any disease into parts that are amenable to study and treatment, rather than comparison to the hypothetical of what kind of "peak" may be achievable for a specific genotype if everything else went well.
This may be useful:
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diathesis-stress_model" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diathesis-stress_model
453yuh46 · · focus · HN ↗
I have read some books about Darwin evolution and to me the new fact was that some fish while are being recognized as the same species are actually acting like different species diverged based on their diet and behaviour - those fishes that had mainly carnivorous behaviour diverged from rest of those that had more plant based food. And they are on a path of becoming species. Microbiology and other things with chemistry simply would not help with anything here, as the main object of their differences is in the way how their brains are working - why with equally equipped "tools" they behave differently and that eventually lead to their evolution to different species. This is applicable to neurodivergent people - we are diverging into different species, though because we still have sex with each other that affects whole humanity. Nothing to do with environment effects, that you are offering as a cause - I do eat the same products, but I look on world differently, apparently more wiser than average human, but that comes at the cost of making social connections, because essentially as a new species we are aliens among humans, but eventually there will be further adaptions, that will make us better at connections and who knows maybe even better than how humans are able to connect with each other. It is just how human evolution works.