THE PROBLEM WITH BEING NORMAL
Something I hear everyday living in Spain: "It´s not normal!" ("no es normal!"), when what they really mean is "it´s not appropriate" or "it´s not logical" or even "it´s stupid". I´m seriously getting to a point where I feel like sitting in front of people with my best teacher face and a good "let me explain something to you". Instead my response, as that of any good 21st century educator/writer wannabe, is to blog it, thus pouring all my frustrated need of broadening people´s understanding into a computer screen. Normal? Let´s see.
Strictly speaking, the word normal refers to anything according with, constituting, or not deviating from a norm. In other words, we´re talking about something purely numerical. Something that falls "reasonably" (to avoid venturing into more mathematical terms such as standard deviation, etc) close to the average. When and why, then, did we begin to understand this word as "morally acceptable", "healthy", or "sane"? And perhaps more importantly, why is that a problem?
The problem is this: The word "normal" as in "healthy" or "acceptable" was literally imported from the biological and evolutionary models of science. Applied to nature it breaks down like this: when an organism, say a frog, is adapted to its environment it becomes an element within a system and it allows it to function properly, favoring the frog´s own healthy survival. We say the frog is "normal" then, since it behaves like most other members of its species. Get the association? Adapted=healthy=normal. Let´s now bring that same logic into the human body. When we say an organ (say a kidney) is normal, we mean it´s the same as most other kidneys, it adapts perfectly to the rest of the systems within us, thus allowing the body to function properly. We say the kidney is healthy. Once again: Normal=adapted=healthy.
Can we apply then the same logic to human behavior? We can (and unfortunately we do), but we have to be aware that the rules of the game change a bit. Here´s how:
When we say a person is normal, that means the person is adapted to a social system, allowing it to function properly and thus... Healthy? [insert loud buzz here].
First let´s look at the not so obvious difference between the system that we adapt to and the systems the frog or the kidney adapt to. The frog and the kidney adapt to biological natural systems that, when properly (normally) functioning, ensure the survival and balance of the entire system. We don´t. When we adapt to our social system what we are really doing is preserving the power structures the way they are. Our social systems, unlike natural systems, have been established on the basis of centuries of inequality and power struggle. Global society nowadays, as we all know, is anything but fair and equal.
So, what does it mean to be "normal" for us? A lot of things. It´s normal to buy products that are affordable and convenient to our lifestyle, without giving any thought to where they come from or who has to be exploited for us to be able to afford them, for example. It´s normal to keep wasting water, food, and resources while watching millions starve to death on the news. It´s normal to damage the environment and hurt other species strictly for entertainment purposes. Normal? Yes. Adapted to the system we live in? Yes. Healthy? Not so sure.
As a conclusion, the problem then is when we transfer the logic healthy=adapted=normal and its counterpart not normal=unadapted=unhealthy to our behavior. In the everyday context people use the term applied to seemingly harmless concrete actions, and most people will argue nothing´s wrong with that. But in the long run it´s important for us to become aware of the fact that, by using "normal" loosely in this context, we´ve created a certain phobia to being perceived as deviated from the norm, therefore making it easier for the ruling system to continue the way it now is. Unhealthy, that is. We´ve become each other´s adaptation police, discouraging the people around us from being different by force of our judgement. It is important that we give some thought to the way we use the word "normal" in our everyday lives, but it is crucial that we start thinking about the number of things we´ve done or stopped doing simply to avoid deviating from the norm and thus being perceived as adapted. It´s only normal!
Strictly speaking, the word normal refers to anything according with, constituting, or not deviating from a norm. In other words, we´re talking about something purely numerical. Something that falls "reasonably" (to avoid venturing into more mathematical terms such as standard deviation, etc) close to the average. When and why, then, did we begin to understand this word as "morally acceptable", "healthy", or "sane"? And perhaps more importantly, why is that a problem?
The problem is this: The word "normal" as in "healthy" or "acceptable" was literally imported from the biological and evolutionary models of science. Applied to nature it breaks down like this: when an organism, say a frog, is adapted to its environment it becomes an element within a system and it allows it to function properly, favoring the frog´s own healthy survival. We say the frog is "normal" then, since it behaves like most other members of its species. Get the association? Adapted=healthy=normal. Let´s now bring that same logic into the human body. When we say an organ (say a kidney) is normal, we mean it´s the same as most other kidneys, it adapts perfectly to the rest of the systems within us, thus allowing the body to function properly. We say the kidney is healthy. Once again: Normal=adapted=healthy.
Can we apply then the same logic to human behavior? We can (and unfortunately we do), but we have to be aware that the rules of the game change a bit. Here´s how:
When we say a person is normal, that means the person is adapted to a social system, allowing it to function properly and thus... Healthy? [insert loud buzz here].
First let´s look at the not so obvious difference between the system that we adapt to and the systems the frog or the kidney adapt to. The frog and the kidney adapt to biological natural systems that, when properly (normally) functioning, ensure the survival and balance of the entire system. We don´t. When we adapt to our social system what we are really doing is preserving the power structures the way they are. Our social systems, unlike natural systems, have been established on the basis of centuries of inequality and power struggle. Global society nowadays, as we all know, is anything but fair and equal.
So, what does it mean to be "normal" for us? A lot of things. It´s normal to buy products that are affordable and convenient to our lifestyle, without giving any thought to where they come from or who has to be exploited for us to be able to afford them, for example. It´s normal to keep wasting water, food, and resources while watching millions starve to death on the news. It´s normal to damage the environment and hurt other species strictly for entertainment purposes. Normal? Yes. Adapted to the system we live in? Yes. Healthy? Not so sure.
As a conclusion, the problem then is when we transfer the logic healthy=adapted=normal and its counterpart not normal=unadapted=unhealthy to our behavior. In the everyday context people use the term applied to seemingly harmless concrete actions, and most people will argue nothing´s wrong with that. But in the long run it´s important for us to become aware of the fact that, by using "normal" loosely in this context, we´ve created a certain phobia to being perceived as deviated from the norm, therefore making it easier for the ruling system to continue the way it now is. Unhealthy, that is. We´ve become each other´s adaptation police, discouraging the people around us from being different by force of our judgement. It is important that we give some thought to the way we use the word "normal" in our everyday lives, but it is crucial that we start thinking about the number of things we´ve done or stopped doing simply to avoid deviating from the norm and thus being perceived as adapted. It´s only normal!
Comments
Post a Comment