Neurodiversity and Neurodivergence: Here's Why They're Not the Same Thing

Post written in collaboration with @blueadhd

In recent years, we have been hearing more and more about neurodiversity and neurodivergence, two terms that seem similar but which, in reality, refer to distinct concepts. Understanding the difference is essential to promoting a more inclusive and scientifically correct view of the human mind.

The concept of neurodiversity

The term neurodiversity was born in the ’90s thanks to sociologist Judy Singer (1999), who proposed to consider human neurological variability as a natural expression of biodiversity. In other words, neurodiversity recognizes that each brain perceives, processes, and reacts to the world in a unique way.

It is therefore not a pathology or an anomaly to be corrected, but an intrinsic human condition: neurological differences are as much a part of our species as genetic or cultural differences. As Armstrong (2010) states, neurodiversity celebrates the variability of the human mind as a resource, not a limit.

Neurodiversity does not distinguish between “normal” and “abnormal”

It is important to emphasize that the concept of neurodiversity does not aim to define who falls within the “norm” or who is outside it. Rather, it invites us to consider diversity as a constitutive element of the human condition. This approach shifts the focus from the medical model (“curing the disorder”) to the biopsychosocial one (“understanding and valorizing differences”), in line with the most recent perspectives of the APA (2023).

The meaning of neurodivergence

Neurodivergence, on the other hand, refers to that group of people whose neurological development diverges from what is defined as neurotypical. Approximately 80% of the population falls into a functioning category considered typical, while the remaining 20% present neuroatypical characteristics (Armstrong, 2010).

This category includes, for example, people on the autism spectrum, with ADHD, dyslexia, dyscalculia, Tourette syndrome, epilepsy, or other neurological and cognitive conditions (Baron-Cohen, 2020). Each of these conditions involves specific modes of perception and thought, with their own strengths and challenges.

Being neurodivergent is not “wrong”

Being neurodivergent does not mean being “defective” or “malfunctioning”. Conversely, much research shows that some neurodivergent characteristics have allowed the evolution of extraordinary creative, innovative, and problem-solving skills (Armstrong, 2010; Baron-Cohen, 2020).

The problem lies not in neurodivergent people, but in a social context that often fails to take into account different modes of mental functioning. As the APA (2023) recalls, inclusion is built by adapting the environment, not by asking the individual to conform to a single model.

Neurodiversity: paradigm, not movement

Neurodiversity is often thought of as a political movement or ideological trend. In reality, it is a scientific and cultural paradigm (Singer, 1999): an interpretative lens that invites us to read neurological diversity as part of human normality. It does not deny the difficulties that some conditions entail, but places them in a broader context that respects individual complexity.

Language and representation: words matter

The way we talk about neurodivergence profoundly influences social perception. Terms like “disorder” or “defect” fuel stigma, while words like “condition” or “characteristic” foster a culture of respect. It is crucial to recognize that a person is not their diagnosis — diagnosis is a useful clinical tool, but it does not define identity.

Towards a more inclusive society

The neurodiversity paradigm does not ask to “normalize” those who are different, but to construct contexts —such as school, work, and relationships — that value cognitive differences. Inclusion, from this perspective, is not an act of kindness but a strategy of collective growth. A more accessible and adaptive world is a world that works best for everyone.

In summary

• Neurodiversity: The natural variability of the human brain.

• Neurodivergence: the condition of someone who functions differently from the neurotypical model.

• Neither implies a value judgment.

• The goal is to understand and value differences, not eliminate them.

References:

• American Psychological Association. (2023). Neurodiversity: Resources and guidelines. APA Publishing.

• Armstrong, T. (2010). The power of neurodiversity: Unleashing the advantages of your differently wired brain. Da Capo Press.

• Baron-Cohen, S. (2020). The pattern seekers: How autism drives human invention. Allen Lane.

• Singer, J. (1999). Neurodiversity: The birth of an idea. Judy Singer Online.

• U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH). (2022). Understanding neurodevelopmental conditions. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.