I'm continuing to read Russell #Barkley's "Taking Charge of Adult ADHD" (2nd edition, 2022). Only now — very close to the end of the book, in Chapter 28 — does he finally make clear what is really motivating him. He describes vividly how his FRATERNAL TWIN BROTHER was killed in a single-vehicle auto accident which he blames directly on his brother's #ADHD. No wonder the drill-sergeant mentality that pervades the book; no wonder the impatience with theoretical problems of defining #ADHD, the relentless subordination of theoretical insight to raw data. #Barkley is a man on a mission. He thinks — with justification — that he's saving his readers' lives, some of them at least.
Just let me say: I'm convinced that serious neuropsychiatric conditions like #ADHD, however pressing their practical implications, absolutely require a theoretically sound approach. And although any empirically based discipline can always use more data, what the neuropsychiatry of #ADHD needs MOST right now is NOT the addition of yet more data to the reams of it that #Barkley and others have already collected; it's a theoretical framework that can explain the data in a way that offers genuine insight and predictive power. You won't get that from an approach that is content with defining neuropsychiatric conditions in a way reminiscent of restaurant menus ("At least 5 symptoms from list A and at least 3 symptoms from list B, OR at least 1 symptom from list A, at least 6 symptoms from list B, and at least 2 symptoms from list C, OR...").
@autistics