|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 3:37 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 4:01 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 5:35 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 6:01 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 6:04 am
|
|
|
|
Cuchullain Nuri I didn't create the words. That was the guild description in the ye olden days. I've been toying around with changing it. NEVER AGAIN THE GUILD FORUM DAYS! But in all seriousness, I think the semi-normal is a nod to the laughability of the idea that there is a normal, and that by most social norms, pagans are outside of it. I think semi "well adjusted, well informed" is probably what is meant by it though, neh? A little of this, a little of that, I think. Most of the founders of FPRC take the word "normal" in a humorous light because of our experience with it and it's variability. It's not like there's an OBJECTIVE normal outside of "lots of people do this", after all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 10:00 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 8:12 am
|
|
|
|
TeaDidikai Deoridhe It's not like there's an OBJECTIVE normal outside of "lots of people do this", after all. Contested. Of amusement, when I first typed it in, I got a 404 error message. Urm, that just says normal is "people who are within the norm" which is, as I put it, "Lots of people do this". Something occurring "naturally" could fall under this same auspice; we know, for instance, through anthro studies that smiling is a near-universal, and thus coded natural, occurance, but that doesn't change the Japanese disinclination to smile.
Norms are defned by a measuring of a group, not by anything objective, and they change over time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 8:51 am
|
|
|
|
Deoridhe TeaDidikai Deoridhe It's not like there's an OBJECTIVE normal outside of "lots of people do this", after all. Contested. Of amusement, when I first typed it in, I got a 404 error message.Urm, that just says normal is "people who are within the norm" which is, as I put it, "Lots of people do this". Something occurring "naturally" could fall under this same auspice; we know, for instance, through anthro studies that smiling is a near-universal, and thus coded natural, occurance, but that doesn't change the Japanese disinclination to smile. Norms are defned by a measuring of a group, not by anything objective, and they change over time. Part of me wants to guess that Tea was pointing to the scientific/mathematical definitions of "normal", which are exactingly objective, rather than the societal definitions.
Could just be my geek sense of humor talking, though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:37 pm
|
|
|
|
Henry Dorsett Case Deoridhe TeaDidikai Deoridhe It's not like there's an OBJECTIVE normal outside of "lots of people do this", after all. Contested. Of amusement, when I first typed it in, I got a 404 error message.Urm, that just says normal is "people who are within the norm" which is, as I put it, "Lots of people do this". Something occurring "naturally" could fall under this same auspice; we know, for instance, through anthro studies that smiling is a near-universal, and thus coded natural, occurance, but that doesn't change the Japanese disinclination to smile. Norms are defned by a measuring of a group, not by anything objective, and they change over time. Part of me wants to guess that Tea was pointing to the scientific/mathematical definitions of "normal", which are exactingly objective, rather than the societal definitions. Could just be my geek sense of humor talking, though. Pft, I'd call that moving the goalposts meself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 8:55 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 1:26 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:00 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 1:03 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:08 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|