I’m surprised that anyone is answering anything. If something would seem very normal to me, as in, I think this is something everyone does, I wouldn’t know of it would seem odd to anyone else. By virtue of it seeming very normal to me.
Something being normal is rooted on it being the norm, as in, something typical. If you think something is odd, you can’t feel like it’s normal just for you, that’s not what the norm means. Maybe it seems natural to you? Sure, but not normal.
Sorry for my reading my pedantic rant. In my case, these kind of rationalizations of the language using its roots seem pretty natural and fun but I know most people look at me weird for over analysing stuff.
You can have been informed by other people that things you thought were normal are not and continue to do them though. It’s likely that abnormal behaviour is pointed out at some point if it’s encountered enough
That’s why I specified that the things I like doing, that feel natural to me, aren’t thing i think are very normal, but “natural”. Even though I know that they are not normal, they are in my nature, for whatever reason.
The moment you are told that something is abnormal, you can’t think of it as very normal, by definition, no? 😅 You might still think that you prefer it, that it feels natural to you (it’s in your nature, personal preference), but not normal.
I think the unspoken part here is the frame of reference used when defining what the norm actually is. Something your family does that you also do can be considered normal in that context, but abnormal in your wider community. Something people in your community do (Mennonites driving horse and buggies comes to mind) might be considered normal in that context, but abnormal within the broader society that community exists in relation with.
So someone could be doing something they consider to be normal that, from a broader or different perspective, would be abnormal. And it’s usually exposure to that outside/broader position that characterizes behaviour you’d consider normal as abnormal - it’s exposure to a different frame of reference for normalcy.
I’m surprised that anyone is answering anything. If something would seem very normal to me, as in, I think this is something everyone does, I wouldn’t know of it would seem odd to anyone else. By virtue of it seeming very normal to me.
Something being normal is rooted on it being the norm, as in, something typical. If you think something is odd, you can’t feel like it’s normal just for you, that’s not what the norm means. Maybe it seems natural to you? Sure, but not normal.
Sorry for my reading my pedantic rant. In my case, these kind of rationalizations of the language using its roots seem pretty natural and fun but I know most people look at me weird for over analysing stuff.
You can have been informed by other people that things you thought were normal are not and continue to do them though. It’s likely that abnormal behaviour is pointed out at some point if it’s encountered enough
That’s why I specified that the things I like doing, that feel natural to me, aren’t thing i think are very normal, but “natural”. Even though I know that they are not normal, they are in my nature, for whatever reason.
The moment you are told that something is abnormal, you can’t think of it as very normal, by definition, no? 😅 You might still think that you prefer it, that it feels natural to you (it’s in your nature, personal preference), but not normal.
I think the unspoken part here is the frame of reference used when defining what the norm actually is. Something your family does that you also do can be considered normal in that context, but abnormal in your wider community. Something people in your community do (Mennonites driving horse and buggies comes to mind) might be considered normal in that context, but abnormal within the broader society that community exists in relation with.
So someone could be doing something they consider to be normal that, from a broader or different perspective, would be abnormal. And it’s usually exposure to that outside/broader position that characterizes behaviour you’d consider normal as abnormal - it’s exposure to a different frame of reference for normalcy.
Yay semantics!