The evil smokers and their fiendish plot!

[HoreTore]

I see.

Is that done either voluntarily or compulsory?

Again, who decides what is normal and what is abnormal?

"What is normal" is objective, not subjective.

[Rhyfelwyr]

"What is normal" is objective, not subjective.

Could you give some examples of normal/non-normal stuff then?

[HoreTore]

Could you give some examples of normal/non-normal stuff then?

I already have. But, I can give more:

In a group where everybody plays video games, playing video games is normal.

In a group where everybody works out regularly, working out regularly is normal.

In a group where everybody drinks, drinking is normal.

Etc etc, I'm sure you get the picture by now. Everything can be considered normal, it is the context the activity is placed within that determines whether or not it's normal.

[InsaneApache]

So if a government half-wit decided that posting on games forums is abnormal and deems it necessary to "denormalise" it, with the sanction of fines and/or imprisonment you'd be OK with that?

[HoreTore]

So if a government half-wit decided that posting on games forums is abnormal and deems it necessary to "denormalise" it, with the sanction of fines and/or imprisonment you'd be OK with that?

I want some of your pot.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I already have. But, I can give more:

In a group where everybody plays video games, playing video games is normal.

In a group where everybody works out regularly, working out regularly is normal.

In a group where everybody drinks, drinking is normal.

Etc etc, I'm sure you get the picture by now. Everything can be considered normal, it is the context the activity is placed within that determines whether or not it's normal.

Surely those are examples of things being subjective... ie there is no sort of objective truth behind what is normal, it is instead relative to the experiences of certain groups/individuals.

[HoreTore]

Surely those are examples of things being subjective... ie there is no sort of objective truth behind what is normal, it is instead relative to the experiences of certain groups/individuals.

No, it is still objective, I probably didn't explain it well enough.

What is normal refers to the context something is placed within, not the action itself. There is no objective truth as to what actions are normal, true. But normalization refers to contexts, and the context is objective, not subjective.

To explain further: let's say we put object X into context Y, which will yield result Z. Z will refer to object X being normal. But object X is completely random. Context Y, on the other hand, is not random, but rather a constant value which will transform object X to "normal". Y is objective.

[HoreTore]

I'm not sure that was a very good explanation... So, I'll gie another one:

The three examples posted above all have one thing in common, one mechanism. This mechanism is objective(as it is constant and will produce the same result over and over again no matter what the input is), and that mechanism is what what makes things "normal".

[Moros]

Drinking alcohol is not normal. It's addictive and dangerous. Idem dito for caffeine. Meat prepared on a BBQ is bad for your health. Fries are teh evil.

Let's forbid living, shall we?

Meh, if this continues, I might start smoking again tomorrow, just to make a political statement. Nanny state

Amen to that! If I ever start smoking it's because of all this nonsmoking stuff.

Also bars without smoke? I can't stand those. Bah! Next we'll only be allowed to drink orangejuice or water.