Can We Reframe What Medication is Actually Doing for the Hunter’s Mind?
The truth is, for some Hunters, medication can be the difference between endless failure and the first taste of competence. And competence is what builds confidence.
For as long as ADHD medications have existed, there’s been a cultural narrative that they are chemical straightjackets. Ritalin and Adderall, we are told, are about forcing restless kids to sit still, about sanding down the rough edges of people who don’t fit the mold. Parents are judged for “drugging their children.” Adults are warned that taking stimulants is giving up authenticity.
This is the lens of the Farmer’s world, where conformity is celebrated and where attention must be corralled into neat rows like crops in a field. But what if we reframe what medication is actually doing for the Hunter’s mind? What if instead of shackles, occasional use of stimulants can be more like scaffolding, temporary supports that let Hunters climb in environments never built for them?
ADHD is not a disease, it is a difference. The Hunter mind was never designed for spreadsheets, factory shifts, or 50-minute lecture periods. It was designed to scan horizons, track prey, improvise in danger, and follow curiosity to discovery. But the farmer’s world we now live in rewards exactly the opposite: sitting still, following schedules, moving sequentially, producing predictable outputs.
That mismatch creates suffering. Hunters are told their natural instincts are wrong. They internalize failure because they can’t keep pace with structures designed for farmers. In that sense, stimulant medications don’t erase the Hunter’s wiring: they help hunters operate in a foreign environment long enough to survive and even thrive.
The science tells us that ADHD is less about lack of attention than it is about irregular regulation of dopamine, the brain’s motivational currency. Without enough dopamine, ordinary tasks feel unbearably dull, while novel or urgent ones light up the brain like a Christmas tree. Stimulant medications like methylphenidate and amphetamines increase dopamine availability, making it easier to sustain attention on tasks that otherwise seem pointless.
They don’t make the Hunter less of a Hunter; they level the dopamine playing field so the hunter can choose where to focus. In the wild, Hunters never needed medication because the environment itself was stimulating, unpredictable, and rewarding. In a modern office, the environment is the opposite. Medications can, in the right circumstances and with careful use, supply the spark that the environment withholds.
That is why the scaffolding metaphor matters. Scaffolding doesn’t replace the building, and it isn’t meant to be permanent. It provides structure where structure is missing, stability where stability is temporarily needed.
Hunters who take medication aren’t being dulled or diminished. They’re being supported in climbing through a world that would otherwise be impenetrable. When the environment is already stimulating — when the hunter is creating art, solving a crisis, or chasing an idea — the scaffolding isn’t necessary.
But when the hunter has to fill out forms, finish homework, or grind through repetitive labor, the scaffolding holds them up long enough to get through. That’s not a loss of authenticity. It’s survival gear.
There are countless stories of children who, once given medication, finally “discover” they can learn. Not because the drug gave them intelligence, but because it built a bridge between their Hunter brain and a Farmer classroom.
Adults, too, often describe the first time they tried stimulants as a moment when the static cleared. Suddenly they could complete the boring tasks that always eluded them, not because their willpower improved but because their brain chemistry stopped fighting them.
Critics look at that and say, “See, the drug is making you conform.” But for Hunters, the experience is closer to having eyeglasses for the first time. The world comes into focus. You can still choose what to look at, but the blur is gone.
Of course, there are dangers. Stimulants can be misused. They can be overprescribed. They can be treated as magic bullets instead of as tools in a larger toolkit.
But the deeper danger is the stigma that surrounds them. Hunters who could benefit avoid them because they fear judgment, or because they’ve internalized the idea that they must suffer through farmer systems unaided. That stigma robs people of education, of careers, of relationships that might otherwise have flourished.
The truth is, for some Hunters, medication can be the difference between endless failure and the first taste of competence. And competence is what builds confidence. Without it, too many hunters collapse under the weight of shame.
And for some of us, it’s just a tweak: I used to use low-dose (2.5 mg) Focalin when I had to edit a book I’d written, a boring and awful task, but that was pretty much it.
The conversation needs to change. Instead of asking whether medication makes hunters conform, we should ask what hunters are able to build when given scaffolding. Does it help them get through school so they can pursue the careers that ignite their gifts? Does it give them the stability to nurture relationships instead of sabotaging them with forgotten commitments and unfinished tasks? Does it allow them to manage the farmer obligations of bills, taxes, and deadlines so they can free their energy for the hunter work of creativity, exploration, and innovation?
In these contexts, medication isn’t conformity. It’s liberation.
When critics sneer that stimulants are shortcuts, they miss the bigger point. The entire Farmer’s world is built on scaffolding: clocks, calendars, spreadsheets, institutions. Farmers built systems to tame the unpredictability of life.
So why shouldn’t Hunters have their own scaffolding too? If stimulants provide that temporary support, they are simply another tool in the human toolbox, like glasses or wheelchairs or hearing aids. We don’t accuse people of betraying their authenticity when they use a ramp to access a building. Why should we accuse Hunters of betraying theirs when they use medication to access the Farmer’s world?
The ultimate goal is not to medicate every Hunter into compliance. The goal is to create a society where Hunters and Farmers can work together, where each set of traits is recognized as valuable, where environments can be designed to accommodate diversity.
But until then, medication remains one of the only forms of scaffolding available to Hunters in a world not built for them. It should be seen not as an erasure of identity, but as a tool that allows identity to emerge. Because when Hunters can get through the boring tasks, they finally have the energy and freedom to unleash their brilliance. And that brilliance is what our world desperately needs.
For Hunters reading this, the choice to use medication is personal. It isn’t for everyone. But it should never be a source of shame. You are not broken for needing scaffolding. You are a Hunter living in a Farmer’s world, and you are using every tool at your disposal to survive and thrive.
That is not weakness; it’s wisdom. And wisdom is what turns survival into flourishing.
This comment could not be posted as intended. Too long. See my substack for full comment https://adhdexplainer.substack.com/p/full-comment-to-hartmanns-scaffolding
Holy hallelujah! Hartmann has never said it this good ever before! Thank you, deeply! To add to the language and the science, I submit the following.
I am a retired (2021) prescribing psychiatrist who specialized in understanding and working with so-called ADHDers and ASDers for over 15 years. During the years of 2006 to 2021 I set up my practice to spend as much time as I could afford to evaluating, understanding, and assisting folks with finding understanding and ways to mitigate the major downsides of the ADHD brainset. By all definitions, I was an "embedded" physician in the ADHD and ASD lived experience worlds for over 15 years. (*Full disclosure at end of this note. Or, if note is too long, see the whole post at my ADHDExplainer)
I use the word "embedded" to describe my intense focus on getting to know my clients lived experiences as much as possible. I cannot claim a personal lived experience of ADHD (quite the opposite). But given the significant time I spent with gathering information including through specialized questionnaires I created regarding typical ADHD characteristics, sensory sensitivities, IQ, working memory testing, medication education, and tracking outcomes, I would say my street creds are unquestionable.
I read over 25,000 pages of primary research literature (PRL) related to all relevant subject areas in ADHD and ASD before I published my fifth updated edition June 2013. That 2013 book was based on over 900 cited sources. It is now 12 years old, and still ahead of its time. Its paradigm changing conclusions (hypotheses) have not been challenged, even in minor ways. And, believe me, I have been and continue to be easy to find and challenge.
I have followed Hartmann's ADHD writings since at least 2011 and, here I am, still tracking his work. I have written some comments here earlier regarding his posts "The ADHD Dopamine Myth," and "The Science Finally Catches Up." Since 2011, I have argued and shown what we currently call "ADHD" is not a disorder. In fact, it may be the norm (especially in the West). But, even if it is not the norm, it still has such a huge upside that calling it a disorder is a stretch.
Hartmann keeps using the Hunter/Farmer analogy, which I think misrepresents the real upside of the ADHD type. I wrote extensively about the "real upside" of the so-called ADHD brainset in my 2013 book. It is this: Except for ADHDers (low working memory) who also have sensory sensitivities, the ADHD brainset is the best brainset for responding to threats of all kinds.
What does that mean? For the full story, you would need to read my 2013 book. It's complicated and difficult for folks to get their head around it, because "dopamine" has been constantly referred to as the "pleasure" neurotransmitter."
Very little attention has been paid by mainstream or science to dopamine's powerful role in "threat response." Attention is finally being paid to dopamine's role in optimizing working memory.
Threat response and working memory are crucial to different aspects of human life. Obviously, I would say, obviously, "threat response capabilities" would be absolutely necessary for survival "of the fittest." I don't think I need to convince any one of that. Those who have the best threat response survive. It's a given. ADHDers have the best threat response capabilities, unless they also happen to have additional vulnerabilities to ASD Conflict Sensivity or significant Sensory Sensitivities.
Why is that? You might believe that the sympathetic nervous system threat response (mostly norepinephrine (NE) based) would depend more on NE functions than dopamine functions. That is the traditional teaching. However, we now know that we have a number of sensory monitors in the so-called "emotional brain (EB)." I have renamed that area of the brain "Threat Monitor Center" (TMC). It has been accepted for over 12 years without challenge. The TMC has monitoring systems for all sensory input. Sensory input is radar of many kinds
There are a number of monitors (even for monitoring the monitors for data conflict) that measure and report sensory input from smell, to taste, to vision, to hearing, to (a bunch more). As any given data input becomes stronger (more frequent) those monitors report to the other areas of the brain involved in threat response that something needs attention. You could think of them as smell, taste, sound, touch, visual (etc) dedicated "alarm bells." They all use dopamine release as the alarm bell signal and when such signaling reaches a certain threshold of dopamine efflux, it sets off the pituitary gland to get the adrenaline and cortisol going. I have to keep this simplified here, but also it needs certain details.
Sorry for all this detail. But, without the detail, it is impossible to explain or understand. I feel it is important because the Hunter/Gather paradigm is showing its age.
So, guess what? Working memory, the now proven strongest variable to academic success, has been shown to be heavily influenced by certain dopamine processes which generally have a baseline and a spiking pattern. The so-called baseline of tonic dopamine has a huge influence on working memory capacity – low baseline, low working memory. It just so happens that there are many things that can change baseline dopamine function and by doing that, they also control working memory.
Here's the key to "threat response capabilities": Threat of any kind, in anyone, creates a dopamine response that elevates working memory in those who are generally at baseline low working memory (ADHD scenario). For those who have optimal baseline working memory capacity (nonADHD brainset) due to optimal baseline dopamine functions, they don't do so well when dopamine functions and presence are pushed to above optimal.
Science now clearly shows that the key to optimal dopamine function for working memory is a "balance." (see Inverted U-Shaped Curve) Not too much, not too little.
To try to keep this easy to understand, think of "threat" as a short-term medication for increasing dopamine presence that increases working memory in those who start with lower baseline dopamine functions.
When dopamine is pushed by threat to above optimal for good working memory, among other things, like ringing alarm bells, threat response is compromised by creating in the nonADHDer an over-amped condition, slower reaction times, more confused and disorganized (panicky), higher blood pressure and heart rates, hotter, etc.
Those side effects of above optimal baseline dopamine are also the same side-effects you can get from dopamine enhancers of all kinds, including medications. Just a quick teaser – dopamine enhancement from alcohol use is a constant. However, if you fit the criteria for ADHD along with poor working memory, it is likely that you will not get sick (alarm bells = nausea, etc) with the same alcohol blood levels as someone who started with an optimal baseline dopamine presence. Getting sick (different than "impaired") from dopamine excess happens way easier in the nonADHD person than the ADHDer. In fact, in my world, I would say most ADHDers do not have the blessing of a more sensitive alarm bell.
I really don't want to intrude much more on this conversation, but, there is so much more to say. One thing that might help you understand what I am trying to explain is what I often said to my ADHD clients who were increasing working memory appropriately with the correct dopamine enhancer at the correct dose was "don't go sky jumping on meds, unless you want to risk getting sick" (meaning, more or less, you would not want the nonADHD brain for threat related activities).
Thus, instead of hunter/farmer, I think it is less misleading to use the terms wanderer-survivalist/straight arrows, or something like that. I just use the terms ADHDer type, or Non-ADHDer types. It also comes down to this question -- Who has the best brainset for the jungle (surviving) and who has to depend on others to survive while doing the "deep thinking"? The ADHD brain upside could be, as I think about it, the reason humans are still here. Thus, what is taking place since academics and thinking twice (civilization?) has been showing up more recently, the advantages of the "survivalist" brainset have become devalued. In that sense, the so-called ADHDisorder is not so much a disorder, but a manifestation of an "evolutionary mismatch."
Almost finally, Hartmann is right on, spot on and should keep shouting – "Stimulant" is a misnomer giving the wrong impression, when, stimulation is actually an unwanted (unless you are trying to achieve that side-effect: not a great idea) side-effect of all dopamine enhancers. Such excess dopamine enhancement in someone who does not fit the criteria for what we call ADHD, creates over-stimulation. Calling dopamine enhancers stimulants is like calling ibuprofen "kidney damage pills."
Hartmann is absolutely right about dopamine enhancers in the Hunter's world. When NOT-hunting, very helpful when using the correct med and correct dose, for optimizing working memory (academics, reading, etc.). WHEN HUNTING, not so great.
Finally, I feel Hartmann's use of the term "environments not built for them" is misleading. No one planned these environments. The powers of the means and values and motivations that have lead us down the civilization road have waxed and waned and, actually, now, with the "new jungle" which is far more threatening than fighting off a couple of wild dogs or a guy or girl with a spear, is way more dangerous to the nonADHDer than the ADHDer.
Again, kudos to Hartmann. I am still hoping that someday he would pay some attention to what I have been reporting for over 12 years.