Neurofluidity: playing with a concept

Neurofluid is a word I thought of a few years ago when exploring the tension between “neurotypical” and “neurodivergent” categories. It is used in other contexts, both to refer to the autistic spectrum and related experiences, and to describe a term that describes a process underlying neuroplasticity, in the sense of brain development and change. Space does not allow me to do justice to the rich literature on personality and mind, identity and politics, which are relevant. I wrote this, encouraged by the positive responses on social media.

Reflecting on my history of moving between different social groups – starting in high school – without fully identifying with a particular group, belonging without being trapped, I realized that one way to find a different position, a third position, to help understand could be helpful – taken lightly . Personally, I didn’t feel like I was neurotypical or neurodivergent, nor did others I had come to know quite well.

The concepts of neurodivergence and neurotypicality felt part of a familiar trend toward dualistic, binary, or polarizing categories that I so often see as problems in many areas of discourse. Raised on concepts such as dialectic tension and Hindu non-dualism, complexity and chaos, the Taoist limitations of naming things, and the psychoanalytic concept of unsymbolized experienced and emergent thirds, Dewey’s experiential view, and the avoidance of division, and a distrust of excessive simplicity, a middle ground of fluid balance –flow balance– feels safer.

Towards a definition of neurofluidity

Here’s a working definition: “Being neurofluid means having the ability to switch between more neurotypical and more neurodiverse self-states, ways of relating, and perspectives on the world.”

It’s worth noting that, as far as I know, this concept is fictional and not based on psychological research beyond my long years as a physician, theorist, teacher, and writer—something I came up with to help explain my experiences. and those of others who do not fit neatly into or identify with the other categories. In a sense it is a category for no category.

With these considerations in mind, here are some highlights about neurofluidity.

Neither neurotypical nor neurodiverse. Neurofluid individuals do not fit neatly into the categories of neurotypical or neurodiverse. Instead, neurofluidity represents a third vertex on a metaphorical triangle. Or maybe it’s a dynamic vertex, a point that moves. If we were to imagine these three categories as axes in 3D space, neurofluidity would exist somewhere in between, but it may not be entirely satisfying to map it that way.

As an identity construction. If neurofluidity is unique, it can become an identity. Like many identities, it could take on a stable reality through definition and shared recognition. However, without psychological research confirming whether it is an independent factor, the concept remains hypothetical.

Possibly purely fictional. Despite being fictional, I found the concept of neurofluidity useful for self-identification. When I shared it – especially on social media – others resonated with it. It seems to appeal to people who don’t fit conventional norms but also don’t fit the neurodiverse label, whether defined by clinical correlates or political identification.

Putative characteristics of neurofluid individuals

• Be quirky or eclectic, but for the most part adaptable to conventional settings.
• Exhibit characteristics of giftedness or “2E” (twice exceptional), defying current categories.
• Score high on openness to experience (one of the Big Five personality traits).
• Balance between introversion and extroversion.
• Exhibiting fairly high social intelligence, even if they don’t always fit in naturally or easily.
• Experience some challenges in social connectedness, information processing, or attention, although these are generally not of clinical significance.
• See things from a different point of view than others while recognizing the reality of normative standards. The concept of ‘positive deviance’ may be useful here, rather than deviance as a maladaptive, even criminal trait.

Furthermore, because they are wary of overgeneralizing or being overly inclusive, they may adapt their thinking styles and emotional approaches depending on the context. Neurofluid individuals can excel at both divergent and convergent thinking, depending on the situation. This adaptability is not about inauthenticity or about being a ‘chameleon’, but rather reflects a kind of pluripotency: the ability to work with different ‘systems’, so to speak. Although not necessarily in a multiple or multiple sense of having several distinct personality states with varying degrees of self-awareness.

Further thoughts

These are some early considerations about neurofluidity. They may not all hold up, many things may be missing or just plain wrong, but in the spirit of thinking out loud, articulate some possibilities.

In conclusion, we might ask, “What does ChatGPT have to say when asked, ‘What if someone is neither neurotypical nor neurodivergent?'”

If someone is neither neurotypical nor neurodivergent, it may indicate that their cognitive patterns or behavior do not fit neatly into either of these categories. The terms “neurotypical” and “neurodivergent” are generally used to describe broad groups of people based on how their brains function or process information, with neurotypical referring to those whose cognitive patterns align with societal norms and neurodivergent referring to those whose patterns can differ in their behavior. ways such as autism, ADHD or dyslexia.

However, human brains and behaviors are complex and do not always fit into such binary categories. Some people may have cognitive traits that don’t fully fit the labels “neurotypical” or “neurodivergent,” meaning they may exhibit traits that don’t fall within the common patterns of either group. This could indicate that they experience cognitive or emotional processing in a way that is unique to them, outside of established categories.

Ultimately, individual differences in cognition, behavior, and experience are enormous, and it is important to remember that these labels are tools for understanding trends rather than rigid definitions of what someone is. People may identify with several or none of these terms, and that is completely justified.

Let me know if you would like additional customizations!