The Importance of Neurodiversity in Permaculture

Terry Portier wrote:

Also, as I think the majority agree there will be those that want to challenge math and science with unfounded opinion and you are right that is ok for them. However, I’m not sure how that satisfy’s Paul’s requirement below. My approach now is just to stop reading and participating on that thread, just don’t have the time otherwise. If I continue to find a site with inaccurate info I will find another, again just don’t have the time to read incorrect info.

They are right to be able to present their opinion. What they do not have the right to do is present their opinion as equal to your facts and 30 years of experience.

That goes for other fields as well.

The point is not to make me better able to think and communicate like you, but put everyone in a situation where everyone can be themselves.

I love this too. So much of your writing really resonates with me Neil. Thank you for your contributions.


I'm going to try it in point form, see if this helps.

celebration of differences in neurotypes

celebration of differences in general

increased understanding of differences

acceptance of differences

understanding that different neurotypes have different communication styles

this understanding makes less conflict and less offences (and I've just added that misspelling to my dictionary - ug!)

different situations require different communication styles - professional, friends, permies, family...

but how to understand that and actualize it WITHOUT expecting everyone to homogenize and become the same?

How can different communication styles interact without creating conflict?

How can we take these thoughts and idea in this thread and use them to decrease conflict and increase understanding between different neurotypes?

is having a lingua franca like the vernacular a useful tool for this? Does it make an acceptable middle ground?

I don't know. These thoughts aren't well formed in my head yet.

I don't like things that exclude people from participating.

This is something I'm trying to figure out.

I talk about my experiences, people interpret it to mean I'm telling them what they should do.

I don't think I'm saying that at all, I think I'm giving an example of one way that worked for me and I feel it's so obvious that the other person/reader/listener is different that they need to find out what works for them.

I'm far too flawed to tell someone what they should do... but it comes across that way sometimes.

The phrase 'what works for me' helps sometimes, but not enough to show that I'm not shoulding on them.

That's the thing where people read more into the words than I wrote. Neither I nor reader is to blame. There is no blame here, it's just something that sometimes happens when different communication styles interact: A miscommunication.

I can't change the other person. I can change myself. I'm working on understanding why and when these miscommunications happens and hopefully can find a better way to express myself.

This is not me saying you (the generic reader of this post, not you, the specific individual) should do the same. This is just my challenge in my life.

“Architectural Design and Building Science”( suggested by terry.)

That's a great solution.

Please make this forum powers that be!!!this is a good solution that lets lets both worlds exist without having to subscribe to the others "truths"...it's genius really!

Chadwick Holmes wrote:“Architectural Design and Building Science”( suggested by terry.)

That's a great solution.

Please make this forum powers that be!!!this is a good solution that lets lets both worlds exist without having to subscribe to the others "truths"...it's genius really!

I would love to observe that forum - I won't be able to post in it because I'm not qualified - but it sounds cool!

Every man is perfectly qualified to post in a forum, this I am better than you stuff can and will drive away people, and it's just not good manners

Not a man, so maybe I don't qualify in the gender department , but, no I really don't qualify to post in an engineering forum. I am not an engineer, have no engineering training, there's nothing I could add to the discussion except to derail it with off-topic comments. How would that help anything?

I don't get why some people are the truth police, no one hands out badges or asks someone to do this job.

The reality is that personalities, beliefs, morals, politics and environment make so many variables that one man cannot proclaim a truth, no matter the amount of study in a field.

I once met a carpenter who was 94 and was making things that I still have awe in, I asked if he was a master carpenter, he said no I've been a carpenter long enough to know the ones who gave me that title dint know better.....

This was especially world shaking to me as I myself had attained a master carpenter level through my journeyman work , and I was 64 years his younger.

So I am weary of any man who knows the "truth" as I feel he is not allowing for further study, or the possibility of being wrong, or the possibility of another person living with a parallel truth that he has not yet realized.

By saying I know better than you....you forgo the possibility of learning from someone who might have a lesson you have not yet come across.

Sorry Tyler, didn't know your gender! Oops.

You don't have to answer to post, you can ask questions in a forum, and you may find that if everyone is listening then everyone has " something " to add, as long as those who hear it want to listen

I doubt we want to go to the public with.....

Out at permies we talk about farms and permaculture and engineering all the time! But don't speak up in any of them or you'll get your head bashed in by an "expert"!

And to be clear I did mean man as in human, as used in all men are created equal....

Chadwick Holmes wrote:
The reality is that personalities, beliefs, morals, politics and environment make so many variables that one man cannot proclaim a truth, no matter the amount of study in a field.

I can't speak about "truth" in this context, but I do believe that there are actual facts, which are not affected by personalities, beliefs, morals, politics and environment. Engineering deals with those kinds of facts, in my opinion.

Chadwick Holmes wrote:
Out at permies we talk about farms and permaculture and engineering all the time! But don't speak up in any of them or you'll get your head bashed in by an "expert"!

Right there is, it seems to me, a perfect example of miscommunication. We were speaking of one forum, just one, in which not just anyone might be qualified to post. Not "any of them," just the one.

The problem is those facts are exactly what I am speaking to, there are folks who disagree with the international building code commission and the building industry in the very same way that many permies disagree with big pharma and the pertrolium based farming industry.

Those industries will argue fact here to if we allowed big pharma and Monsanto to voice their "truth" here

Many of these facts are purchased in labs, they are bought just as surely as Monsanto is buying doctors to say "it's safe"

The modern IBCC momentum will have us living in perfectly engineered coffins and death traps.thats the reality of my world, my fact, my "truth"

You cannot seal in an organic without issue, that's just one part of this building industry selling us its products of plastic death

Those simply are not reality for every man, just like pesticide as best practice is not every mans reality

So an engineer said I can't post here, all it takes is a rocket heater person to say I can post there and a goat sheep and llama person to assert her facts and argue that I am not allowed, before long it's just experts helping no one, they have all been banned from being there

Exclusivity is a slippery slope that ends in a lot of people with the same mindset, who have nothing to learn from eachother and no one to teach.

Sound boring to me, and not what I think of as permies

Well I think we're making progress on seeing the problems.

The question now is, what can we do to start getting diverse mindsets/neurotypes to better understand each other and improve communication between them. I think a forum for building science is a great idea, but I don't the place split into factions.

Not talking for Paul here - but from what I've read of his writings, I don't think an exclusive 'members only' forum is likely.

I know it would be more comfortable to be able to talk in specialist speak, but I can't see how that fits with the goals Paul has for this site.

Best treat it as a hypothetical situation, at least for the time being.

Chadwick Holmes wrote:Those simply are not reality for every man, just like pesticide as best practice is not every mans reality

You seem to be saying there are no facts. I disagree. Within certain disciplines, there are facts which are agreed upon by all parties who study that discipline. These facts can be demonstrated by tests. Some can be proved by equations. You appear to not believe this to be the case. Your reality and my reality are dramatically different, so different that we may be barely capable of communicating. To me, you are describing a magical or perhaps insane world, to you it is normal.

I see that natural builders and science types are already split and the issue is in us being forced together by lack of individual outlet. I think to force the two together is like trying to make sheep and hog people raise their animals on the same feed.

Burra Maluca wrote: I think a forum for building science is a great idea, but I don't the place split into factions.

I'm not seeing how one forum devoted to physical science could split the entirety of permies into factions or cause it to become boring. Maybe I'm (as usual) misunderstanding what people were talking about. I thought people were talking about one forum, the Building Science forum, in which an agreed upon set of parameters (engineering, physical science) are adhered to by all participants. All the rest of the board needn't demand facts - it doesn't! We're not even supposed to ask for proof or citations.

Chadwick Holmes wrote:I see that natural builders and science types are already split and the issue is in us being forced together by lack of individual outlet. I think to force the two together is like trying to make sheep and hog people raise their animals on the same feed.

Why would they be forced together? There's already a building forum. Why couldn't there be a building science forum for the science types? The non-science types have the entire rest of permies. Two different types of building forum would give each type the opportunity to communicate with those whom they can understand.

I don't think anyone is saying that some people can't post. I'm saying that some people know more than others. If I want a house built, I'll pay more attention to Terry than to Chadwick, because Terry knows far more about the subject. It's the same principle over, say climate change. If I want to learn about glaciers, I'll pay more attention to Jason Box than Ted Cruz, because Jason Box has spent decades studying glaciers, and neither I nor Ted Cruz are qualified to comment without reference to people like Jason Box. If Jason Box tells me I need to worry about melting glaciers, I'm not qualified to argue, and will be very much inclined to listen.

If someone asks a general question about ecology, I can probably have a crack at it. If someone asks a specific question about Scottish ecology, I can probably have a crack at it (or know who to ask). If someone wants to know about the ecology of the Pacific North West, and there is someone here who has spent decades studying the ecology of the Pacific North West, I will shut up and listen, and maybe stick my hand in the air to ask a respectful question.

In order to understand who knows more than others, we need to be able to list credentials and reference source material and, (I hate to say it, because it's against policy) ask for them.

Yes, that may be a reflection of my mindset, but I don't think my opinion on building things equals Terry's knowledge. At best I might be able to phrase something along the lines of "is it remotely possible that ... or am I just completely barking?" - and be prepared to be told I'm completely barking.

@Neil L.: "....we need to be able to list credentials and reference source material and, (I hate to say it, because it's against policy) ask for them."

I can see where it may get sticky to ask for credentials, but is it really against forum policy to ask for the source references for claims being made? It doesn't have to be a nasty request, just a flat "need-to-know" what the basis for anyone's claims may be. In the case where the reference may be some huge tome, perhaps an excerpt that does not violate copyright restrictions, along with the reference, would suffice. Again, seems to be the best that one can do given the availability of the material at hand. Perhaps?

I shouldn't have to list my credentials to warn someone not to cut structural members of their house out without consulting an engineer, that's construction 101


That's the only building advise I have given so I assume you did your research and that's what we are eluding to?

John Weiland wrote:@Neil L.: "....we need to be able to list credentials and reference source material and, (I hate to say it, because it's against policy) ask for them."

I can see where it may get sticky to ask for credentials, but is it really against forum policy to ask for the source references for claims being made? It doesn't have to be a nasty request, just a flat "need-to-know" what the basis for anyone's claims may be. In the case where the reference may be some huge tome, perhaps an excerpt that does not violate copyright restrictions, along with the reference, would suffice. Again, seems to be the best that one can do given the availability of the material at hand. Perhaps?

It's more accurate to say that you need to be very, very careful asking for references and credentials. Saying "citation needed", which anywhere else is just shorthand for "someone needs to add the reference for this", will likely get the post suspended or deleted.

There are ways to say the same thing, but you need to be very nice about it around here.