I common a good definition of normal?
if not what is one?
what is the most practical definition of Nnormal?
if not what is one?
what is the most practical definition of Nnormal?
definition of normal
- Thread starter Barnabas
- Start date
^ Yep.
And that which is considered acceptable by the majority is often that which is most common among that majority and/or most desired by that majority.
There are others but terms such as "most common", "average", "preferred", "known" and "accepted/acceptable" are usually what people are really describing when they use the word normal.
And that which is considered acceptable by the majority is often that which is most common among that majority and/or most desired by that majority.
There are others but terms such as "most common", "average", "preferred", "known" and "accepted/acceptable" are usually what people are really describing when they use the word normal.
Last edited:
Normal is average, within 3 standard deviations of a normal curve
It's just the majority, it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with whether something (or someone) is right or wrong, better or worse, etc It's just the range that most of a population fits into.
Normal is average, within 3 standard deviations of a normal curve
so in a nutshell normal is common
In psychological terms, normal is defined as anything within the parameters of healthy, which is everything that isn't defined as 'abnormal' psychology. It's quite a large band without any sort of center point. I would assume that if someone did hit the center point in every respect, that would in fact be abnormal, heh, since it would certainly be a statistical anomaly.
Normal is average, within 3 standard deviations of a normal curve
I beg to differ. Look at the stigma that attaches to those who are not "normal," either physically or mentally. Personally, I believe that normalcy is highly overrated.
well thats a whole nother area of philosophy, whether Normal is good or bad(or if it even can be quantified in those terms) is not in question.
What is in question is the definition of the word itself.
but to go off on the debate of whether normal is good or bad, I would say neither. Since it has been losley defined as common, normal superior or inferior.It simply represents the largest sect in a group, and that sect would be the norm. Being above or below would be considered abnormal.
I actually wasn't saying anything to the contrary, but I want to reply to this statement: Yes, there is a stigma attracted to people who are not physically or mentally normal. Personally, I think it arises out of fear. People fear what they don't understand, and abnormal people are a minority by definition so there are less chances to meet and understand them. I believe the stigma associated with being abnormal is directly (inversly) proportional to the level of exposure people have to those who aren't normal. It would dissipate if abnormal people suddenly became a majority (which ironically would make them normal). It's like what that famous guy said, Henry something? that if every gay person came out of the closet today, that would be the end of the gay rights movement. Because the level of exposure would instantly destroy the social stigma attached to being gay.
I realize it's a different discussion, I was just responding to May's assertion that iy was neither good nor bad, inferior or superior.
If you think that normal just means common, then look at the negative: abnormal. What does that mean?
It doesn't just mean uncommon (the opposite of common), as the word also has a negative connotation. We reserve the word exceptional to infer a positive connotation upon something uncommon.
So normal means that something is common in a positive way. Unexceptional means that something is common in a negative way.
The trouble is that these words are commonly misused. People will describe something as abnormal when it is actually exceptional. And they may say something is normal when it actually unexceptional. It's a subtle example of the leveling process we were warned about by Kierkegaard.
It doesn't just mean uncommon (the opposite of common), as the word also has a negative connotation. We reserve the word exceptional to infer a positive connotation upon something uncommon.
So normal means that something is common in a positive way. Unexceptional means that something is common in a negative way.
The trouble is that these words are commonly misused. People will describe something as abnormal when it is actually exceptional. And they may say something is normal when it actually unexceptional. It's a subtle example of the leveling process we were warned about by Kierkegaard.
Different people have different meanings for the same words.
Few people are aware of the official dictionary version of what a word means so I don't place much value on that.
If I said to you "beautiful" you have to search inside your brain (not the dictionary) for the meaning of that word. Some people may see a picturesque landscape, some may see the face of thier lover, some will hear a "beautiful" peice of music etc.
For every word/concept you will have an inner representation of what that word/concept means.
EVERYONES IS DIFFERENT.
Notice how you got several different answers to what normal means.
They are all right.
The meaning of a word is whatever meaning the person you just said it to applies to that word or whatever meaning you intended it to have.
Seeing as the point of communicating is to get an idea across to someone else, it's more useful to think about what that word means to the other person
Few people are aware of the official dictionary version of what a word means so I don't place much value on that.
If I said to you "beautiful" you have to search inside your brain (not the dictionary) for the meaning of that word. Some people may see a picturesque landscape, some may see the face of thier lover, some will hear a "beautiful" peice of music etc.
For every word/concept you will have an inner representation of what that word/concept means.
EVERYONES IS DIFFERENT.
Notice how you got several different answers to what normal means.
They are all right.
The meaning of a word is whatever meaning the person you just said it to applies to that word or whatever meaning you intended it to have.
Seeing as the point of communicating is to get an idea across to someone else, it's more useful to think about what that word means to the other person
Last edited:
I was speaking more of "normal" in the social sense. As in, if everyone prayed 5 times a day around you, it'd be normal to do so. To not pray at least 5 times a day would be abnormal. Or if everyone only wore hats and socks and no other clothes, it would be the normal thing to do.
Health wise, I'd agree with you and go for the clinical definition.
Normal is boring to me most of the time. Normal is something that can be used against people and their uniqueness, making them fit into some boxes of normal characteristics, normal behavior and normal choices.