Normal

What is normal? Have you ever considered that question? If we are talking behavior then normal, or normality is that state of being normal. But, what is normal behavior? Behavior can be normal for an individual when it is consistent with the most common behavior of that culture or for persons in that culture. "Normal" is also used to describe behavior when it conforms to the most common behavior in society. That still gets us no closer to defining what normal is?

If we are talking social norms, then we are talking about those norms that are the explicit or implicit rules specifying what behaviors are acceptable within society. They can also be defined as shared ways of thinking, feeling, desiring, deciding, and acting; these are observable as regularly repeated behaviours and are adopted by others because of their dominance and acceptance, but does that make them normal? We can also talk about normal in reference to psychometrics, mathematics and chemistry, but we still get no closer to defining what normal is.

Let's begin with what abnormal is. Abnormal is deviating from what is normal or usual, typically in a way that is undesirable and unaccepted. But, what makes one behavior normal and the other abnormal? The answer is not found so much in the semantics of the word but in the culture outside of the word. We know acceptable behavior or normal behavior differs from culture to culture. Does culture then define what is normal acceptable behavior? I do think culture plays a role in defining what is acceptable, and what is acceptable usually plays a major role in what is considered normal.

The French sociologist Émile Durkheim indicated in his Rules of the Sociological Method that it was necessary to offer parameters to distinguish normality from abnormality. He suggested that behaviors or as he called them, "social facts" are present in the normal, and exceptions to that behavior, when social facts are not present, indicate abnormal behavior. Durkheim's model of normality explained that the most frequent or "normal" behaviors, will persist through transition periods in society. According to Durkheim, there is a two-fold version of normality; behaviors considered normal on a societal level may still be considered abnormal on an individual level. On the individual level, people who violate social norms will invite punishment from others in the society in the harshest sense and scorn and ridicule in the mildest sense. Durkheim seems to imply that there are two sets of norms: those that survive or "persist" through transition periods and those that do not.

What would separate those norms that persist from those that do not? I believe cultural acceptance would be first on that list. Those that persist and survive and continue to be considered normal are those that a majority of culture still considers acceptable. Those that do not will be those that have been rejected by a vast majority of culture. Normal, then, is defined by the dominant culture. Now, it is certainly not that simple, but for today, it is one point to take away from the discussion on what is normal. Normal is not this state of being that just exists and is. Normal is a construct defined by the dominant of current culture. There are certainly many other factors that go into this idea; ideas like who is dominant and how did they become dominant? And, certainly, where does God fit into all of this because He does fit into this. But, those questions are for another day. Blessings!