ADHD

I personally wouldn’t create a new term for it. ADHD is the medically and socially accepted right now and while I don’t disagree with you it’s not derogatory so not a huge need to change. The content of your presentation discussing the details and nuances of adhd symptoms is what is more important. But calling out that it’s not just attention deficit is probably relevant.

I think of it as a problem of "attention dysregulation". At least that feels like a closer description, since attention is a very central component in many of the difficulties we experience - it just can't be reduced to a "deficit" (whatever that could even mean).

You probably know this already, but I like to (re)phrase existing knowledge in several ways even if just for myself, because one can know something in more than one way: Attention regulation is how a brain prioritises, filters, and emphasises information about the external world, and I believe it also plays a big (and interesting) part in executive function

I understand the general concept of 'attention' as an allocation/distribution mechanism of cognitive resources, so calling it "deficient" feels a bit like category error. It's like reducing the challenges faced by a governing body responsible for mismanaging an economy to an "economy deficit problem". Just doesn't make much sense, even if the end result looks like a deficit in resources (analogous to focus) (in some areas).

'Attention difference disorder' is nice and simple and encompasses the variations that happen. However, my personal favorite is 'nonconsensual multitasking'.

I think executive functioning disorder is the best description of it. Adhd has never made sense as the name to me.

Dr. Hallowell is pushing for it to be called VAST Variable Attention Stimulus Trait since it better describes the experience from the patient's point of view. I like the term but change in the medical industry takes time so we shall see. 😊

I might use the idea of horseback riding as an analogy. The neurotypical reflection of a human mind is a well-trained horse with a proficient rider. The rider is the concious viewpoint of the mind tied up with concious will. The horse is the rest of the mind (including the parts that control the body).

Someone with ADHD is riding a poorly-trained horse. It doesn't mean that the horse doesn't sometimes respond correctly to the commands of the rider, but it is far more likely to listen when the commands align with whatever the horse would prefer to be doing, and sometimes the horse won't listen at all even if the rider is trying desperately to get it to stop eating grass and get back on the path.

The analogy here drives home the idea that there is a disconnect between what the concious mind "wants" to do and what the rest of the mind is doing.

The analogy doesn't stretch very far, but by highlighting one of the major flaws of the analogy you can likewise highlight the painful irony of ADHD: to an outside observer there is no way to see that the rider is trying anything at all. This whole analogy is taking place inside one person's skull, and the entire concept of struggling to steer your own mind doesn't make much sense when you have a horse and rider that work so smoothly together that they feel unified.

I've recently heard the term "global creatives", which to me is maybe a bit too rosy but it explains reasonably well how we work - we can create at the global scale, but not at the local scale, if that makes sense. I.e. devise the whole system architecture or the project strategy, but not necessarily execute the details.

"ADHD is not an attention deficit, but an intention deficit" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tpB-B8BXk0&t=25