We have spent decades trying to "curcure" or "train" neurodivergent people to fit into a neurotypical world. We’ve treated Autism, ADHD, Dyslexia, ...
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
I have the feeling that a lot of us are neurodivergent in one way or another — diagnosed or not. What we call “normal” is really just what most people do, not necessarily where creativity or real added value comes from. Many people simply follow the flow without really building anything new. But people like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Richard Stallman — and you and me, each in our own way — we’re not exactly wired to just follow the script.
And of course, that kind of mindset tends to confuse the majority… sometimes even irritate them, simply because we don’t process the world the same way they do.
Which brings me to the real question: are we genuinely neurodivergent… or are others just neuro-softened? (Said with affection, of course)
Thank you for the encouragement and for such a thought-provoking perspective! I love the term 'neuro-softened'—it perfectly captures how the world often prizes compliance over the raw, jagged edges of true innovation.
You touched on exactly why I’m moving so cautiously with this project. The term 'Neurodivergent' is still so new and broad, and I often worry that by 'defining' every spike or trait, we risk limiting people. If we categorize every unique ability into a specific 'disorder' or 'label,' we might miss the bigger picture of human cognitive diversity.
That’s why I’m spending so much time in the research phase before I even go to college. I want to build a system that honors the 'Spiky Profile' without forcing users into a box. I’m moving with care because I don't want to just build another tool that says 'You are X, so you need Y.' I want to build a bridge that adapts to the human, whoever they are.
It’s about celebrating the 'glitch' as a feature, not a bug. In your experience, where do you think the line is between a 'helpful label' and a 'limiting box'?
Based on my own experience, it's crucial to avoid labels – it's far better to focus on defining personalized adaptations based on each individual's journey. Unfortunately, applying labels or limitations will categorize the project and turn it into a tool for exclusion rather than inclusion – the opposite of its original purpose.
Exactly—you’ve hit the 'North Star' of this project. Labels are often just shorthand for a medical code, whereas needs are universal.
The goal for this 'Cognitive Bridge' is to be label-blind. The bridge shouldn’t care why you’re struggling with a task; it should only care about providing the specific support you need to cross it. If we focus on the friction points rather than the diagnosis, the tool becomes a custom fit for everyone.
I'm deeply touched by this concept. It feels like you're putting genuine effort into understanding the needs and perspectives of individuals who've often been overlooked or misunderstood. I can only imagine the sense of isolation and frustration that must come from trying to navigate a world that doesn't always accommodate our differences – a cognitive bridge could be incredibly empowering for many people.
While this is a refreshingly bold idea, I also think about its practical implications, and there may be gaps to fill. But for now, your idea has sparked something in me, and I'm interested in exploring it further. If anything comes to mind, I'll be sure to share it with you.
You’re right—the practical implications are where the real challenge lies, and that’s exactly where I want to dive deep.
I’m currently in a 'listening phase' because I know I don't have all the answers. If you have a moment to share this concept with your own circles or anyone who navigates these challenges daily, it would be a huge help. I’m looking for the 'gaps' and the 'what-ifs' that only a wider community can provide. I’d love to hear whatever comes to your mind!😁
Thank you so much Richard for the kind words and for sharing your story! That 'lightbulb moment' of looking up the term neurodivergence is something so many of us can relate to—it’s like finally getting the manual for a brain you’ve been driving for years.
I love that you’re diving into Logseq and Zettlr. Those 'networked-thought' tools are much closer to how our brains actually function compared to rigid, traditional folders. My goal is to take that 'linked' logic and bake it directly into the OS so the organization happens automatically, saving you the 'executive function tax' of manual tagging.
Since you're experimenting with those tools, what’s the biggest 'friction point' you’ve hit so far? I'd love to know what still feels like an uphill battle!
This is exactly the type of post I joined for. I am currently working on a tool that I specifically designed to combat Tone Blindness. And Cognitive Overload. I am an ADHD Adult software engineer that has been doing it for 29 years, and I have tried every productivity tool and method that I could find. And nothing really seemed to work. I consistently would start a new system and then spend 90 percent of my time settling up and tweaking my system and 10 percent actually doing things. I became the guy that is very good at solving hard problems but can’t be relied on to get regular tasks done. It took me way too long to realize that I needed to stop trying to force my brain to work like a typical one and instead lean in to my neurodiversity and create a system that works for me. My tool , Divergent Flow, is the result of lots of learning about how ill suited most applications and tools are to a neurodivergent brain. I completely agree that there is a huge gap , and a huge opportunity for folks to build tools that can truly help people with neurodivergent brains. My advice to anyone interested in building tools for this community is to really try to understand some of the science behind it. The time blindness that the article mentions is a good example, and shameless plug I just posted an article about that very subject and you can read it on my profile! But understand the Now vs Not now concepts helps you to see that traditional systems like calendars and jira tasks are next to useless. Effective tools lean into the Time Blindness and create a sense of urgency only for the things that need to be worked on. I am working on the beta release of my tool and would love for people interested in this topic to sign up for the beta, to give me feedback on the tool. I will also be publishing some more articles about ADHD and how we can build systems that work with our brain they can be found here and on my blog at getdivergentflow.com. I look forward to seeing what other amazing tools this community can come up with !
I am genuinely floored to get this kind of feedback from someone with 29 years of experience! I’m actually just starting my journey—I took a gap year after high school to dive into this before heading to college—so hearing that my vision resonates with a seasoned engineer like you is a massive boost.
You hit the nail on the head with the '90% tweaking' trap. We spend so much energy building the 'perfect' system that we have nothing left for the actual work. That’s exactly why I want to move toward a Cognitive Layer that handles the 'setup' automatically.
I’m definitely heading over to check out Divergent Flow. Your focus on 'Now vs. Not Now' is such a critical unlock for overcoming the paralysis we face. As someone who has seen the tech world evolve for nearly three decades, what’s the one thing you think modern software gets most wrong about human focus?
I made a typo I have 20+ years, actually 23. I think speaking for myself, as I am not an expert, that modern software is missing a key component that keeps me in the same cycle of trying a new app, spending all the time seti g up, using for a couple of weeks and then quitting. And that is the observability factor. Taking a task management app for example. Most I have seen are well written allow you to really organize your tasks and make all sorts of folders and tags. But where I think there is a huge room for improvement is that the tool’s functionality remains fairly static. You enter things, organize them, and then create views and lists to help you get things done.if you don’t like how the dashboard gives you summaries you can modify it. Or, you start to lose interest, or get hit with the wall of awful, when three or four overdue tasks hit you in the face every time you open and you get tired of changing due dates and just stop opening the app. I think that adding a observability an feedback loop could be a huge game changer for me. If instead of seeing the same overdue tasks every day and continuing to snooze them, the app can observe the behavior and instead of showing a red task it would say, “hey, you have re scheduled this task a couple times, is it still important to you?, should we delete it or would you like me hold on to it and ask you if you still want to do it in a couple weeks?” For me that would be a much better experience. Because for one it is not “screaming at me” about a task that is really not very important every day. And two it is offering a solution that can remove the feeling of failure I get looking at a red task but still keep the task in case I do want to do it later.” That is probably a too long answer to the question but it is something I have been thinking about a lot, since I am currently trying to write the framework/engine that will allow applications to use the users data and events (telemetry) over time to observe patterns and learn to make the application more useful to wash user.