In the late 1990s, psychologist and sociologist Judy Singer¹ developed the notion of neurodiversity, which was associated first with autism and advocacy for the rights of people with autism, then expanded to other types of neurodivergence such as ADHD, learning disabilities (dyslexia, dyscalculia, dyspraxia, dysphasia), giftedness, hypersensitivity, synesthesia, intellectual disability and so on. Yet the literature on this subject tells us that the word neurodiversity also refers to the whole range of human cognitive profiles. Therefore, it is identified not only with people who have been diagnosed as neuroatypical but also with all neurocognitive variations of the human species. As Juliette Speranza reminds us, neurodiversity is comparable to the biodiversity associated with the variety of life forms on Earth.² Although this comparison to all life forms and ecosystems can seem useful to our understanding of the plurality of different cognitive profiles, we should not forget, as Singer tells us, that neurodiversity is not a natural phenomenon on the decline as biodiversity has turned out to be; on the contrary, it is connected to a cultural movement that advocates for difference and the recognition of difference.

As a movement, neurodiversity obviously presupposes the neurocognitive plurality of human beings, yet it is defined first and foremost by a commitment to favour better inclusion of behavioural attitudes that are not neuronormative. Understandably, inappropriate reactions to people who lack the ability to function according to societal norms are frequent. Functioning differently from the dominant

…