|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 10:41 am
"Normal" includes everybody except everybody else.
You are "normal," and others are "abnormal" in comparison to you, because you adjust on an individual level to stimuli, as others do. Thus, what is normal to you is not normal to every other being in this universe, no matter how minute the answer is.
When we're talking in generalizations...it's easier to classify and marginalize people.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 11:21 am
I think there is such a thing as "normal", but it changes depending on place and situation.
For example, at an all-girls Secondary School, the definition of "normal" for the students would be something like "female, aged 10-18, in full-time education". Someone not fitting that description would be considered "abnormal" for that place. However, the conditions required to be considered "normal" are very different in, say, a high-tech laboratory complex.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 1:19 pm
I mean in the general population, but good point biggrin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 2:50 pm
I saw someone mention that there are normal behaviors if not normal personalities, and I agree. I would have to argue that there is such a thing as a normal person and that is the person who behaves in the expected manner most of the time. You can't really talk about personalities because, yes, each one is unique.
I also don't think people like to be classified as "normal" because that implies that they are not unique. I think that's part of the reason why these discussions crop up, so that people can say that they are not normal or that there is no normal. Anyway, I also say that what is defined as "normal" changes as society changes, but that is natural. If norms did not change, society would stagnate and crumble (or be replaced).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 10:29 am
Mr--K I saw someone mention that there are normal behaviors if not normal personalities, and I agree. I would have to argue that there is such a thing as a normal person and that is the person who behaves in the expected manner most of the time. You can't really talk about personalities because, yes, each one is unique. quote] Once again, I mean among typical tendencies, not including people who are incapable because of various mental conditions, etc. I mean people that are capable of ordinary behaviour.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 8:55 pm
I agree completely. The only common feature among humans is our difference, makeing normality a paradox. If it is normal to be weird, than it is weird to be normal and so on and so forth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 5:27 am
Normal; a definition.
1) Conforming to the recuring norm.
In other words, be like the general population.
We are not individuals, we are all people, and we all have the same set of morals, standards and laws to adhere to and follow to the letter. Normality isn't set down to what you think, but how you act. What other people can see makes you the person that you are regardless, and if you were to go outside in a pink tutu and faerie lights screaming "I AM YOUR GOD BE MY SHEEP MOO MEOW ******** MOO MEOW!!1!" you're obviously a total weirdo and chances are you'll be arrested for public disturbance. Breaking the law goes outside the bounds of normality, disagreeing with the moral and ethical guidelines that society has set down is abnormal.
Once you leave your comfort zone you are entering into the aberrant, and like all atypical surroundings it will take time for you too to conform and "fit in" aka you guessed it, return to the norm.
We're all normal within our surroundings, taken out of that we flip flop around struggling for air like a fish out of water until we evolve and develop the necessary equipment to thrive, strive and set a new standard of the norm in that particular society. Of course there is no worldwide normal, how could there be when there's no worldwide anything, would that make everything else not exist too?
Normality exists, and to say otherwise just about cancels out half of our so called achievements. You could argue that "well den u just be provin ma point that normality don't be existin".
lol@statistics, science and generalisations not existing, and lol@you for thinking it was possible.
Prove me wrong and I be givin' yo a cookie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 10:47 am
Foreign Spit In other words, be like the general population. We are not individuals, we are all people, and we all have the same set of morals, standards and laws to adhere to and follow to the letter. No we don't. Everyone's idea of what is moral is different, and laws are something forced on us by our leaders, not a definition of who we are. If laws made us normal, then we still wouldn't be normal, as there are so many groups under different laws, and treated differently by laws due to race, heritage, sexuality, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 3:46 pm
There is no such thing as absolute normality. There are simply trends, beliefs, and cliques. I don't believe anyone came to be a person they claim to be of moral standards, if they consider themselves normal, without having been influenced by some other person, the desire to conform and fit in, or a societal or cultural custom.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 8:36 pm
Dusk-Hunter Foreign Spit In other words, be like the general population. We are not individuals, we are all people, and we all have the same set of morals, standards and laws to adhere to and follow to the letter. No we don't. Everyone's idea of what is moral is different, and laws are something forced on us by our leaders, not a definition of who we are. If laws made us normal, then we still wouldn't be normal, as there are so many groups under different laws, and treated differently by laws due to race, heritage, sexuality, etc.
Those laws are built on a set of morals society has set down, it doesn't matter whether you agree with them or not all that matters is that you conform and follow them, either that or risk getting arrested. It has nothing to do with race, sexuality, gender and/or religion. You live in a society, you follow the laws, and it is that point alone that makes us normal. The mentally ill, the retarded, the criminals of society, the ones locked away from us for their and our own safety are the abnormal. No one aspires to be then, because they're considered the lowest of the lowest of the low, the throw aways and trash, the freaks.
How we're treated has nothing to do with normality but our own personal actions and whether we choose to fit in or become dejected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 9:33 am
Foreign Spit Dusk-Hunter Foreign Spit In other words, be like the general population. We are not individuals, we are all people, and we all have the same set of morals, standards and laws to adhere to and follow to the letter. No we don't. Everyone's idea of what is moral is different, and laws are something forced on us by our leaders, not a definition of who we are. If laws made us normal, then we still wouldn't be normal, as there are so many groups under different laws, and treated differently by laws due to race, heritage, sexuality, etc.
Those laws are built on a set of morals society has set down, it doesn't matter whether you agree with them or not all that matters is that you conform and follow them, either that or risk getting arrested. It has nothing to do with race, sexuality, gender and/or religion. You live in a society, you follow the laws, and it is that point alone that makes us normal. The mentally ill, the retarded, the criminals of society, the ones locked away from us for their and our own safety are the abnormal. No one aspires to be then, because they're considered the lowest of the lowest of the low, the throw aways and trash, the freaks.
How we're treated has nothing to do with normality but our own personal actions and whether we choose to fit in or become dejected.That's like saying that normal is being forced to be what everyone wants you to be. That's not normal, that is fear and threat. To ACT normal is to do what you are talking about, but BEING normal is to believe in how you act, and no vast and overwhelming group of people think and believe so similarly as to be called normal. You'll note I specifically removed the mentally ill, deformed, etc, from this argument, but don't be so hard on them; it's not their choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 9:34 am
PS-We don't HAVE to follow laws. All we have to do is accept the consequences of breaking them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 25, 2007 6:22 am
Dusk-Hunter That's like saying that normal is being forced to be what everyone wants you to be. That's not normal, that is fear and threat. To ACT normal is to do what you are talking about, but BEING normal is to believe in how you act, and no vast and overwhelming group of people think and believe so similarly as to be called normal. You'll note I specifically removed the mentally ill, deformed, etc, from this argument, but don't be so hard on them; it's not their choice.
No srsly...they are freaks and social outcasts whether they chose to be or not, they are. No one will class them as normal, the only place in which they could ever be considered normal is a mental asylum or nursing home.
And that's exactly it. Normality is being forced upon us, also who said that domninance and oppresion doesn't breed normality? You certainly get your perfect society under such oppression, just look at Mao, Pol Pot and Hitler for that. Ethically, morally, socially they were screwed, but as a functioning society they were the kings. No one broke the rules because the consequences were harsher and more brutal (and when I say no one, I mean less than in todays society).
They were united, they were one, they were the perfectly normal society. The organisation that they achieved is what todays governments strive for, taking a different route (the humane route) they have failed in achieving that. Perfection is what te outsiders see looking in, others opinions is what matters when it comes to social standing and definitions. You don't get many describing themselves as"themselves", such honesty cannot come from someone who might take it personally.
Quote: PS-We don't HAVE to follow laws. All we have to do is accept the consequences of breaking them.
We may not have to follow laws, but not many will accept the consequences, that's why we have lawyers, courts and a system that is followed and abided by.
EDIT: I'm tired so I hope that made some, if not a little sense, grammatically or otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 25, 2007 9:11 am
I understand your point, and I agree that a "perfect society" of that type is impossible without oppression. The problem is that it loses true perfection when it is forced to resort to such evil means of control. A truly perfect society would be everything you listed, but respectful of our rights to be unique, as well as not so cruel in it's means of control.
However, I still think that you shouldn't base the definition of normal on how people are forced to act, but on how they act when they have the right to decide. At the same time, I respect your opinion; I'll just agree to disagree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 25, 2007 2:41 pm
Normal = Average
*shrug*
Edit: I suppose I should elaborate.
There is a "normal." Whatever the general accepted way to do things is, is considered normal. When you drive a car it is generally accepted you drive it on the road and stay in the painted lines. Of course no one HAS to, and it certainly determine if it's right or correct. It simply means it is the accepted way of doing or being.
Therefore if you want normality you do things the way the majority of the population has agreed to do them. IE- the average.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
