I saw a post like this some time earlier this year and my first reaction is the same…
Normal? Seriously?
The article attempts to address this in an incredibly clumsy way by saying, well, everyone is normal in some way! It totally misses the mark and basically pays lip service to the issue after it set the stage, switching over to bigger picture diversity.
Benefit of the doubt, the intention is to say ‘average’. The people in the middle of the bell curve.
‘Normal’ suggests that, outside of that range, you are abnormal if you are terrible and abnormal if you’re talented above or below the median.
There’s a non-zero overlap between abnormal and neurodivergent, both ways.
Given the number of occurrences of ‘10x engineer’ they should have gone with that and not ‘normal’.
Normal? Seriously?
The article attempts to address this in an incredibly clumsy way by saying, well, everyone is normal in some way! It totally misses the mark and basically pays lip service to the issue after it set the stage, switching over to bigger picture diversity.
Benefit of the doubt, the intention is to say ‘average’. The people in the middle of the bell curve.
‘Normal’ suggests that, outside of that range, you are abnormal if you are terrible and abnormal if you’re talented above or below the median.
There’s a non-zero overlap between abnormal and neurodivergent, both ways.
Given the number of occurrences of ‘10x engineer’ they should have gone with that and not ‘normal’.