The disease model for diagnosis of psychological and neurological diversity is problematic. With a virus, you are either infected or you’re not. All psychological and neurological so-called “disorders” are actually on a multi-dimensional spectrum that includes much of the territory considered “normal”.

And how the “symptoms” exhibit can vary greatly with the situation, from what kind of day or week the individual is having to the levels of light and sound in the location where the “diagnosis” is being made. It’s like trying to draw a line on the beach to demarcate the land from the water while ignoring the waves and the tides.

Just because we make up a name for something doesn’t mean that what is named is an actual thing with hard and fast boundaries. The closer one looks, the less distinct the boundaries.

Do we have to see “normality” as something that distinguishes between an individual and the majority, or can we just say it is normal for a population to have a wide variation of traits.