Neurodiversity reveals there’s no such thing as a normal brain: Best ideas of the century

Once upon a time, science worked on the assumption that there was such a thing as a “normal” brain that neatly conformed to society. Those who were different might be diagnosed with an illness or mental health condition, and were treated as though something was wrong with them. Over the decades, scientists honed the concept that neurodevelopmental conditions such as autism, ADHD, dyslexia and dyspraxia should be considered distinct and were reflective of sharply different brains.

Then, in the late 1990s, a new idea started to emerge. What if these “disorders” were better understood as natural variation in the way human brains can be wired? What if, instead of a hard line between normal and abnormal function, human traits and abilities existed on a spectrum along which we all fit somewhere? And while people towards the extremes experience challenges, their unusual brains also come with unique strengths. When seen this way, diverse brains aren’t a problem to be solved, but an asset that, if properly supported, could benefit everyone.

The concept of neurodiversity grew out of discussions in online autism advocacy groups, but it wasn’t long before there was scientific evidence to support it. By 2013, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders did away with the diagnosis of Asperger’s as a “higher-functioning” form of autism, instead recognising one condition, autism spectrum disorder, on a scale from level one to level three, depending on the amount of support required. The notion of neurodivergence as a spectrum was firmly embedded in medical literature.

Studies from the early 2000s onwards have reported that autistic people are more likely to have above-average skills in mathematical reasoning and attention to detail. People with ADHD score higher on tests of creativity, as do people with dyslexia, who also excel at pattern recognition and big-picture thinking. People with dyspraxia have also been found to be more creative as they develop sophisticated coping methods.

These kinds of findings led many scientists to believe that neurodiverse conditions are no evolutionary accident. They exist because our ancestors benefitted from having a few visionary thinkers, creative types and detail-driven perfectionists in the group. With a handful of brains wired with different specialist skills, the group would be better able to explore, adapt and survive. Some researchers are beginning to rethink the autism spectrum along these lines, too, suggesting that there may be distinct subtypes of the condition with different clusters of challenges and abilities.

Some researchers warn that reframing neurodivergent conditions as “superpowers” may not always be helpful. “By being too positive, we risk undermining how serious it can be, particularly if unsupported,” says Jessica Eccles, a psychiatrist and neurodiversity researcher at Brighton and Sussex Medical School in the UK. Nevertheless, “now that we have a vocabulary for it, we have opened the door to understanding both its strengths and challenges so that people can move more easily through the world”, she says.