Originally posted by Grampy BobbyI disagree a bit. "Normal" tends to mean what is common. That is not the same as acceptable. It is normal for toddlers and (apparently) soccer players to want to bite people. It is an ordinary part of their existence. It is not acceptable to do so, however. When said toddler or soccer player bites someone, they must be reprimanded and taught to handle their frustrations some other way.
Mine: In the United States of America, as of 2014, "normal" is behavior in word and deed that society considers acceptable.
Things that are "normal" are generally the things that fall within the range of "average" for that category.
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyF. or worse. One of me is plenty, if not a surplus with a redundant backup. 😕
[b]2014 RHP Public Forum Individuality Survey
Question: If all active contributors to Red Hot Pawn Public Forums thought as you think
and communicated in the same style as you, these public forums would become:
A. Awesome (daily activity would quintuple the first week)
B. Much More Enjoyable
C. More Enjoyable
D. About the Same
E. ...[text shortened]... t participating. Reply Letters 1) A. and 2) B. will be assumed for those who post a Thumbs Down.[/b]
2 edits
Originally posted by Sahuaro"In the United States of America, as of 2014, "normal" is behavior in word and deed that society considers acceptable."
I disagree a bit. "Normal" tends to mean what is common. That is not the same as acceptable. It is normal for toddlers and (apparently) soccer players to want to bite people. It is an ordinary part of their existence. It is not acceptable to do so, however. When said toddler or soccer player bites someone, they must be reprimanded and taught to handle ...[text shortened]... are "normal" are generally the things that fall within the range of "average" for that category.
"I disagree a bit. "Normal" tends to mean what is common. That is not the same as acceptable." ~Sahuaro
Yes, I read contemporary behavioral scene in the same way as you: Thanks to the dialectic of change, what was normal and common behavior a decade ago is now viewed as abnormal; what was viewed as abnormal and uncommon is now accepted by an articulate majority as the new normal because it has become common and within the parameters of revised law.
Note: My irreducible opinion is that populations in virtually all cultures view their language usage and actions as 'normal'.
"normal" is according to a norm.
During times there where different ethical systems in place more often than not claiming to directly stem from a divine being.
Problem is that most holy writ needs interpretetaion and interpretation can differ.
Jesus himself was confronted with the problem that the Pharisees considered themselves very near to the nrom and he found they weren't.
In fact such norms as exist today are very weakly founded and thus give rise to much debate. And thus in our society today there are several "normals" which are not generally accepted.
Originally posted by PonderableInsightful, Ponderable. Thank you.
"normal" is according to a norm.
During times there where different ethical systems in place more often than not claiming to directly stem from a divine being.
Problem is that most holy writ needs interpretetaion and interpretation can differ.
Jesus himself was confronted with the problem that the Pharisees considered themselves very near to the ...[text shortened]... ate. And thus in our society today there are several "normals" which are not generally accepted.
2 edits
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby (OP)
2014 RHP Public Forum Individuality Survey
Question: If all active contributors to Red Hot Pawn Public Forums thought as you think
and communicated in the same style as you, these public forums would become:
A. Awesome (daily activity would quintuple the first week)
B. Much More Enjoyable
C. More Enjoyable
D. About the Same
E. Less Enjoyable
F. Much Less Enjoyable
G. Only two members would still post (just Russ and you)
Responses: Please select 1) Your 2014 RHP Public Forum Individuality Survey Reply Letter A-G for yourself;
and also 2) Reply Letter A-G you think a majority of other active contributors would choose for you.
Default Choices: Reply Letters 1) C. and 2) E. will be assumed as the choice of those who read this thread
without participating. Reply Letters 1) A. and 2) B. will be assumed for those who post a Thumbs Down.
Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
"F" is the natural choice for people who value their individuality.
As for the 2nd question, I don't care much what other people think about my posting style. You can't please everyone.
Originally posted by ChessPraxis
F. or worse. One of me is plenty, if not a surplus with a redundant backup.
"Question: If all active contributors to Red Hot Pawn Public Forums thought as you think
and communicated in the same style as you, these public forums would become:
A. Awesome (daily activity would quintuple the first week)
B. Much More Enjoyable
C. More Enjoyable
D. About the Same
E. Less Enjoyable
F. Much Less Enjoyable
G. Only two members would still post (just Russ and you)"
Concluding Observations: 1) If we all thought alike and communicated with identical vocabularies in the same style, the daily dreary sameness within these Red Hot Pawn Public Forums would be beyond boring. There wouldn't be anyone to disagree with our individual opinions and points of view. So "E, F and G" would seem to most accurately describe the result. 2) To a greater or lesser degree we all think of ourselves as "normal" a) whether our behavior aligns with the prevailing norms and expectations of the societies in which we live and breathe and have our being or b) represents deviation.
3) Your observations?
Originally posted by PonderableIt always depends on who is doing the speaking/defining.
"normal" is according to a norm.
During times there where different ethical systems in place more often than not claiming to directly stem from a divine being.
Problem is that most holy writ needs interpretetaion and interpretation can differ.
Jesus himself was confronted with the problem that the Pharisees considered themselves very near to the ...[text shortened]... ate. And thus in our society today there are several "normals" which are not generally accepted.
99% of people would say "normal" is however they are.
And yet c. 90% of Americans also see themselves as somehow "special".
Que sera, sera.