We have decided some brain quirks are disorders (and get accommodations, as is compassionate), whilst others are flaws (and get slurs). But no one picks their hardware. You cannot earn a better prefrontal cortex or deserve a calmer amygdala. Nor does one get to pick the environment they are born in, which will inform their choices later in life. Even the capacity to “learn better” is a roll of the dice, some brains start the race with sprinting shoes, others with lead weights.
So when we call someone stupid, lazy or insane we are not describing a choice, but simply announcing which kinds of unlucky we’ve decided are worthy of scorn.
Sry, but afaik there are some flaws with this hypothesis. Neurodivergence is no defined Illness but a catch-all-term for deviations from the norm. The thing with normality is, nobody really wants to be a normalo, and only very little people fit there. Everyone has his deviations. Neurodivergence refers to mental deviations from the (statistical) norm.
Whether you Like it or not, Person A with schizophrenia and Person B with depression only have in common that they both suffer from a ICD-defined Illness. That aside, theres not much in common between the two.
Calling the ability to be mentally ill, a defining trait of humanity is kind of strange. That would make normal people less human?
I think ‘normal’ needs to be interpreted in evolutionary context. What population traits and prevalence helped with thousands of generations? Not what traits helped individuals in the last handful of generations of modern lifestyle.
But anyone can fuck right off if they try to stop me swearing at them for doing dumb shit. Or more likely, I’ll be the one to fuck right off and minimize my exposure to them - since many of them likely have uncontestable social or economic power over me.