What’s Normal?
I came across the phrase “normalized deviancy” recently. It’s the idea that we can get used to things that are not normal and we come to behave as if they were normal. Things like 1-2 hour commutes to work or wearing ties (or heels) perhaps. But this phrase has the embedded idea that there is a “normal”; I’m not so sure of that.
Anyone who wants to read the history of the world, or even just the many ways that people today live around the world should see that normal is a very flexible idea. Even in just one country the variation in the way we live can be high. But deciding what “normal” is this way is using it as a descriptive term. How about as a prescriptive term?
So what should “normal” be? We could decide that by figuring what we want, what’s good for us, or what we’re evolved to be. But I’m not sure that’s much better. Now we have to decide what is good to be able to measure what normal should be. So how do we describe what is good? There are different value systems and what’s good in one environment isn’t good in another; there’s also a physical aspect to this as well as a moral or ethical one.
What we think of as “normal” is really seems to be an adaptation to our situation and our environment. My commute seems normal since I do it routinely and many people I know also have similar commutes. Flying into a rough strip in Africa or northern Canada is not normal because I only read about it online or in books. It’s healthy and a good survival trait to be able to adapt to one’s surroundings.
PTSD in returning vets might be an extreme example. In a war zone, being hypervigilant and not wanting to drive under overpasses help you live longer. Since the danger is high these are very strong adaptations. But they’re also adaptations not useful back at home so it becomes a problem.
Some adaptations, like pilots in Africa thinking rough brush airstrips are normal, are not completely successful. The rate of accidents for cargo aircraft that use these strips is significantly higher than similar pilots in developed countries. However it’s probably a reasonable guess that the accident rate is lower than it would be if the pilots didn’t adapt!
When I reach for something, a doorknob, a tool, or a pen, my hand automatically adapts to the shape of the object and I pick it up without thinking. I’ve picked up a similar object probably thousands of times before. A man with arthritis knows his hand won’t work as reliably. He learnes to recognized that and to take a bit more time and to beware of how it might go wrong. He adaptes to change. One day I may have to as well.
Humans can be highly adaptable. Our brains are basically pattern recognition machines that can easily learn new patterns and responses to those patterns. The trick we have is to do is to keep adapting. One way is to let one generation die off and the next take over. This works slowly but reliably at a population level but is a lousy strategy for an individual.
A better way is be aware and to recognize changing patterns. And to respond to that change successfully we have to watch and be aware of things happening around us. That’s requires effort and attention instead of going on mental autopilot. Life is a full time job.