Or from a different perspective, we are all abnormal. We all have our different traits and characteristics that make us unique.

Absolutely! That’s what this entire debate comes down to!

To be honest, I hate this argument. I’m doing it at school as part of my English curriculum at the moment, and I can’t stand it.

To me, there is nothing strange here, nothing deep or philosophical – in fact, we all inevitably come to the same conclusion, and most of our reasoning occurs on a sub-conscious level.

The matter really is very simple when it comes down to it:

Normal is just a word used to describe those similar to yourself, and likewise, abnormal is just a word used to describe those different to yourself.

So, if I were to say, for example, that all lesbians on this forum were abnormal (from a personal perspective), I would be completely justified, because I am not a lesbian. The word abnormal is neither a compliment nor an insult, and the statement is nothing but truth.

Then, of course, I could generalise further and say that lesbians are abnormal to all gay males (indeed, to all males), and again this would be justified – because it is nothing but the truth. I could then do the same thing several more times until I’m no longer even describing humanity.

As I see it, normal is just numerous sets of concentric circles expanding outward from a single individual, where each set of circles represents one personal trait, and each consecutive circle represents one generalisation.

So for me, one set of circles would be like this (this has to be in words, but imagine a diagram is there to help):

First circle: Me, and where I currently am.

Second circle: I am a gay man (as opposed to a lesbian).

Third: I am gay (as opposed to straight).

Fourth: I am human (as opposed to an animal).

Fifth: I am an animal (as opposed to a plant, bacteria, etc.).

Sixth: I am a living organism (as opposed to, say, a rock).

See? If I choose to focus on the third circle, then that is what normal is. If I focus on the fourth, then that is what normal is, and so on. Of course there are many other sets of circles that define who I am – my Christianity, for example, in which I would include things like my denomination, or my liberal/conservative inclinations.

In turn then, abnormal just becomes whatever I am not – whatever the circles do not cover.

This debate is nothing mysterious – normal is just subjective, that’s all.

Thanks.

Yeah, I’ve been described as ‘beyond my years’ many times since I was 11, for numerous reasons (my intelligence – not that I’m boasting – my dry wit, my world views, etc. I even look older than I am).

I seem to have a certain gift for insight and clear thinking (at least, compared to my peers) – perhaps in time it will grow into real, useful wisdom! 😉

“But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all: for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit…”

1 Corinthians 12:7,8

I am teaching university students at the moment and I got an essay the other day with the word ‘concentric’ used in a way which indicated the student had absolutely no idea what it meant. I think people must find these words in thesauruses and think they sound intelligent. I’m glad to find someone who knows what the word means anyway.

I agree with your conclusions to an extent William. There is another thread somewhere in the cosmos here on which someone was trying to define the word normal. Here was my reply at the time:

The reason that you wont find a constructive definition of the word normal is because (in the absence of religious tradition) its relative. The Macquarie Dictionary defines it as “conforming to a standard or the common type”. That is, conforming to the most predominant or most accepted types of behavior for that time and place.

The Azandi tribe (in Africa… or maybe its Pupa New Guinea?) integrate male homosexuality into their puberty rights of passage, swallowing sperm gives a young boy masculinity, it makes him stronger and a tougher warrior. Women are suspect and because men expel semen during sex with women they are hence ‘less of a man’ because of the process therefore sex with women is usually restricted to pro-creative activity. Male homosexuality is glorified, it is ‘natural’ and ‘normal’ within that time and place.

Obviously that isn’t the case in western countries, men are even prone to think the opposite, that sex with women makes you more of a man. Normal as a universal, for all time and all people ideal doesn’t exist outside of Judaism, Christianity and Islam and even in these instances the things denoted as ‘normal’ or ‘natural’ are not laid out that specifically. More often than not it is what is ‘abnormal’ or ‘unnatural’ that is mentioned. What does that tell us?

Normal also depends to a large extent on who you talk too. I am reminded of the minister who spoke to one of the F2b members and he believed that homosexuality was normal but anything outside the basic realm of sexual expression in the bedroom wasn’t, for him it wasn’t normal. What is normal and what isn’t is different for everyone and people put their boundaries in different places. Maybe that is why Christianity is so offensive to others, because it demands that there are standards…

I think I came to a similar conclusion to yours though less concise and philosophically inclined. However I would argue that there is benchmark not specifically for ‘normal’ but for ‘true’ in the realm of morality and that benchmark is depicted in the bible. That standard only comes into common use however if you believe it correct. That is not to say that there is no truth objectively but the step from theoretical, theological standards to everyday human behavior is a subjective matter of faith.

The concept of universal claims for morality and consequently behavior is a big one and one of the fundamental reasons people are hostile towards Christian theology, they want options and rationality. Most of the time God delivers neither.

Yup, your much more concise… 😆

Yes I had to go and look it up again because it was bugging me… I need a life 😆 I remember studying it at uni just after to becoming a Christian and having a particularly bad day temptation wise, making a mockery of the phrase “keeping every thought captive”. So I sit in on a lecture on male homosexuality in Melanesian societies… It helped! 😆 I thought it was a relevant example for a site like this but I was relying on memory with the facts.

I love this topic and here is a twist for you to keep the thread alive for my own entertainment. Is there a difference between ‘normal’ and ‘natural’? People esepically in theology tend to use the words synomously though I would argue they mean different things. I’ll see what other people have to say and then put my two cents worth in if no one else says what I am thinking.

“But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all: for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit…”

1 Corinthians 12:7,8

Love that scripture, even as a 10yr old its what always appealed to me as something I wanted. You do have a great ordered way of thinking, mannn that coupled with the growing insight you have and God given wisdom as the years progress will be gold.