HSP a.k.a. Highly Sensitive Person

[Tzuyu]

http://socionist.blogspot.com/2012/1...onics.html?m=1

[nanashi]

http://socionist.blogspot.com/2012/1...onics.html?m=1

I don't like feeling different from other people. Something doesn't sit right when enneagram 4 types, especially, tell me I'm unique and or gifted. I think everyone had gifts, and much of the language used to talk about these things is counterproductive (see Don't Tell Kids They Are Smart) and segregational. I really wanted to have adhd becuase then my hyperarousal made more sense without people fawning over me in a way that made me feel self-conscious and as though I was being asked to participate in a delusion. The tests don't show adhd, so I'm left with intensity that doesn't meet bipolar criteria, either.

I prefer the sensitivity explanations. I am an ectomorph, and philosopher de Beauvoir theorized caution or sensitivity could result from inhabiting a delicate corpse. I'm not weak. I lift people's furniture as a hobby when they move. And I was a commuter cyclist for a decade. But, I'm wiry. And I am entj-reckless with my body, but it screams at me 'No' pretty often...Like when I want to dive for low footballs but have 15% bodyfat and no padding nor health insurance. .

I keep reading articles education professionals write about their 'gifted' students and their mental distress at things like racism or sexism or genocide. I've always been like that. It's systemic thinking, I thought. But I don't know. I don't like it being portrayed as a 'gifted' thing. I think that others(verb) those not deemed gifted, when ...everyone has some gifts.

This all reminds me of the orchid kid and dandelion kid hypothesis. I think that's useful

[Ave]

I don't like feeling different from other people. Something doesn't sit right when enneagram 4 types, especially, tell me I'm unique and or gifted. I think everyone had gifts, and much of the language used to talk about these things is counterproductive (see Don't Tell Kids They Are Smart) and segregational. I really wanted to have adhd becuase then my hyperarousal made more sense without people fawning over me in a way that made me feel self-conscious and as though I was being asked to participate in a delusion. The tests don't show adhd, so I'm left with intensity that doesn't meet bipolar criteria, either.

I prefer the sensitivity explanations. I am an ectomorph, and philosopher de Beauvoir theorized caution or sensitivity could result from inhabiting a delicate corpse. I'm not weak. I lift people's furniture as a hobby when they move. And I was a commuter cyclist for a decade. But, I'm wiry. And I am entj-reckless with my body, but it screams at me 'No' pretty often...Like when I want to dive for low footballs but have 15% bodyfat and no padding nor health insurance. .

I keep reading articles education professionals write about their 'gifted' students and their mental distress at things like racism or sexism or genocide. I've always been like that. It's systemic thinking, I thought. But I don't know. I don't like it being portrayed as a 'gifted' thing. I think that others(verb) those not deemed gifted, when ...everyone has some gifts.

This all reminds me of the orchid kid and dandelion kid hypothesis. I think that's useful

I don't like the term "gifted" either, but the concept it designates is valid. There are two reasons why I don't like it. First, it gives an impression of superiority, without addressing the issues such individuals may have. Second, it is not intellectually neutral since it implies something about divine intervention in one way or another, "gifts".

In French we use "haut potentiel" meaning "high potential" to refer to individuals who have a greater capacity to solve intellectual or emotional problems. The concept is valid because such individuals need to identify how they function differently from others, in a qualitative sense. Alot of these people are in situations of academic or professional setbacks if not total failure. This is because society (school, education etc) has a way of imposing problem-solving strategies that are not compatible with how these individuals function.

We certainly need to talk about this more, because if we don't these individuals become lost and may even get destroyed by life's circumstances. If aware of who they are, they can function well above what others are able to do in terms of problem solving. I have seen high potential individuals in both cases.

Note that all high potentials are HSPs as a rule, but not all HSPs have high potential.

[nanashi]

I don't like the term "gifted" either, but the concept it designates is valid. There are two reasons why I don't like it. First, it gives an impression of superiority, without addressing the issues such individuals may have. Second, it is not intellectually neutral since it implies something about divine intervention in one way or another, "gifts".

In French we use "haut potentiel" meaning "high potential" to refer to individuals who have a greater capacity to solve intellectual or emotional problems. The concept is valid because such individuals need to identify how they function differently from others, in a qualitative sense. Alot of these people are in situations of academic or professional setbacks if not total failure. This is because society (school, education etc) has a way of imposing problem-solving strategies that are not compatible with how these individuals function.

We certainly need to talk about this more, because if we don't these individuals become lost and may even get destroyed by life's circumstances. If aware of who they are, they can function well above what others are able to do in terms of problem solving. I have seen high potential individuals in both cases.

Note that all high potentials are HSPs as a rule, but not all HSPs have high potential.

The thing is, I think we should express it as a normal variation and a propensity for certain kinds of work but not as across-the-board superior. And unfortunately words like 'high potential' aren't modified by 'in systems design' or in 'conflict resolution', and they end up sounding like uppity chosen ones when we all very much need our mutual humanity and equal worth acknowledged ... and when people soooo easily venerate us for shit that's ...EASY FOR US TO DO. It's way easier for me to Ni-Creative my way through the flaws in a system and help revamp it in minutes of inspiration and pulling Te factoids to back up the whys than it is for me to wash my dishes. Good god does nanashi have to hold her own hand and encourage herself to wash a dish. Feels like I'm dying. lmao

[Ave]

The thing is, I think we should express it as a normal variation and a propensity for certain kinds of work but not as across-the-board superior. And unfortunately words like 'high potential' aren't modified by 'in systems design' or in 'conflict resolution', and they end up sounding like uppity chosen ones when we all very much need our mutual humanity and equal worth acknowledged ... and when people soooo easily venerate us for shit that's ...EASY FOR US TO DO. It's way easier for me to Ni-Creative my way through the flaws in a system and help revamp it in minutes of inspiration and pulling Te factoids to back up the whys than it is for me to wash my dishes. Good god does nanashi have to hold her own hand and encourage herself to wash a dish. Feels like I'm dying. lmao

It's not a propensity for certain kinds of work but a form of cognition that's different from the norm, if we're defining the norm as what is expected out of people by society. Note that the form is cognition is different in a qualitative sense more than in a quantitative one. Their optimal problem solving strategies are different. It's a waste of time trying to tell all people they are all the same, when in fact some people really are different in the way they function and trying to get them to compare themselves to "normal" people is actually damaging. This is not about dressing in black and lighting candles and thinking you are different because of it. High potential individuals have a different cognitive process: much faster thoughts, associative thinking that alot of people might find odd, higher empathy, emotional sensitivity, perfectionism etc.

Also I think it's best to focus mainly on what we are good at, not on fixing what we are bad at. We can work on our weak spots when it comes to professional or personal strengths but I actually think it's better to focus on strong areas. It brings more fullfillment. I'm not sure what you mean by this...

"It's way easier for me to Ni-Creative my way through the flaws in a system and help revamp it in minutes of inspiration and pulling Te factoids to back up the whys than it is for me to wash my dishes."

...Since revamping a system in practice takes more than few minutes, lol.

I think what you're saying is that we have to challenge ourselves, not be complacent in what we are used to doing? I agree with that, if that is what you are saying. I also don't know why focusing on what we innately have potential for is being complacent, it actually sounds delusional to think so. Having potential for something doesn't mean it won't be a challenge.

[nanashi]

It's not a propensity for certain kinds of work but a form of cognition that's different from the norm, if we're defining the norm as what is expected out of people by society. Note that the form is cognition is different in a qualitative sense more than in a quantitative one. Their optimal problem solving strategies are different. It's a waste of time trying to tell all people they are all the same, when in fact some people really are different in the way they function and trying to get them to compare themselves to "normal" people is actually damaging. This is not about dressing in black and lighting candles and thinking you are different because of it. High potential individuals have a different cognitive process: much faster thoughts, associative thinking that alot of people might find odd, higher empathy, emotional sensitivity, perfectionism etc.

Also I think it's best to focus mainly on what we are good at, not on fixing what we are bad at. We can work on our weak spots when it comes to professional or personal strengths but I actually think it's better to focus on strong areas. It brings more fullfillment. I'm not sure what you mean by this...

"It's way easier for me to Ni-Creative my way through the flaws in a system and help revamp it in minutes of inspiration and pulling Te factoids to back up the whys than it is for me to wash my dishes."

...Since revamping a system in practice takes more than few minutes, lol.

I think what you're saying is that we have to challenge ourselves, not be complacent in what we are used to doing? I agree with that, if that is what you are saying. I also don't know why focusing on what we innately have potential for is being complacent, it actually sounds delusional to think so. Having potential for something doesn't mean it won't be a challenge.

I'm not sure where you got 'complacent'.

And I understand having different cognition as being fit for unusual work. My being able to rework systems in minutes is not the only work in the world. Yes. I'm sensitive. Yes, I have associative thinking. Yes, I have the perfectionism. But it is only a piece of the pie of work needed in the world.

[Ave]

I'm not sure where you got 'complacent'.

It's something I added based on what I had understood you had said. Apologies if that is not what you meant.

And I understand having different cognition as being fit for unusual work. My being able to rework systems in minutes is not the only work in the world. Yes. I'm sensitive. Yes, I have associative thinking. Yes, I have the perfectionism. But it is only a piece of the pie of work needed in the world.

I am not denying that at all, I think we're just talking about two different things, haha.

[nanashi]

https://www.wired.com/2012/03/can-ge...hesis-a-bloom/