Valdis wrote:
> Interesting concepts, Sherri. IMHO, the difference between a 'true' ADD
> person, and one who 'appears' to be one is their accomplishment[or lack
> thereof], not their 'style'. I have two friends both who work like you
> describe above. The difference is the one who has been diagnosed as ADD
> accomplishes next to nothing -- the other is a productive scientist. The
> ADD person has been fired from numerous jobs, started many failed
> businesses, been through many affairs, divorce, etc. etc. The scientist
> seems to 'self-organize' out of his chaos, the other friend just waffles,
> and keeps dreaming. From my experience, those who I know that are
> creative work like Sherri describes, the key is that they can emerge from
> their mess with a solution/product/accomplished goal. Could it be that
> they have a [strange] attractor and those w/ADD do not?????
>
> Valdis Krebs
I have to disagree (partially) with Valdis. I'm a "psuedo-add" type. I
get things done at the last (or a little later) minute, but I've never
been in much trouble because of it. There's a fine line between the way I
work and the syndrome, I'm on one side of it, some of the kids we see at
our learning center are on the other. The true ADD doen't have to be
dysfunctional, however. There are a lot of different strategies they can
use to make end runs around their wiring problems. In the case of the
diagnosed ADD, there's more to his behavioral problems than ADD. One of
the most respected ADD doctors is a diagnosed ADD person. I've seen his
video and have recommended his methods and strategies to others.
As for self-organization, I manage by piles. I sort them and pull stuff I
need as required. If two piles or more start to merge, they are obviously
of little current value. I put them in boxes and take them out of the
work space until my wife reminds me I haven't been into them for four or
five years. Then they are relegated to a position of nonexistence.
One point I take from Sherri's perspective on this is something we did in
liguistics in the '70's: study the broken systems to learn about the one's
that work. I did research with aphasics, first doing a lingusitic current
situation analysis (what parts of language still existed on the
performance/perceptual level) and then attempted to see how much cognition
still existed but was now being handled in non-linguistic mode. The same
notions can be applied to any cognitive behavior. There are alternate
modalities, alternate strategics, alternate tactics.
--jzavacki@wolff.com John Zavacki The Wolff Group 800-282-1218
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>