Quote:
Originally Posted by Slamjammer
I agree with 8thStreet....the answer was a bit over-rationalized, and ended up describing "health" more than "normal".
To borrow the language of statistics..."normal" would be the societal "median", while "abnormal" would be a large variance from the median. Of course it's difficult to ascribe mathematical values to behavioral issues on the individual level. So, it's difficult to measure if a person is at a 10 point variance or 15 points or whatever.
Nonetheless, IMHO it's a cleaner, simpler method to define "normal".
For example, everybody gets angry from time to time. That's normal. Some people get angry more often and react to it in a variety of physical ways. That's a "variance" to the norm. Sometimes an extreme reaction occurs often enough that "anger management" is needed. An even greater variance from the norm.
|
Its very difficult to measure the median happiness, or mental health, or anger in a society. It is largely left to peoples perceptions of what normal is as the OP described.
If you want to define it statistically then the OP is in the UK so....
Median income in UK 29,000
Average life expectancy in UK 81.5
World happiness scale 22 out of 150
World Happiness Report - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I would say when comparing yourself to the average UK citizen you would be comparing yourself to a pretty healthy productive person with lots of freedoms.
I have always liked Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Every time I go to therapy they ask me if my basic needs are met and if I am safe. Without that it is hard to make progress.
Maslow's hierarchy of needs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia