What is a normal personality?

This question tends to be a little profound about the philosophical implications of psychological concepts. The question is about the relativism, and authority in which a normal personality is called to be. Who determines who is normal and who is not?. Isn't this view an absolute and authoritarian establishment of ideas?, could, as a result, psychology work as a political mechanism in order to "delete" the not normal behaviours?, why psychology goes beyond philosophy and religion in establishing such concepts?, do the psychology and its methods have an absolute scientifical authority?, can psychology ultimately and in a far future explain all the "important philosophical questions"?. These questions are all rather philosophical, and I want your views, although they don't finally solve these problems. I would rather that the answer is given by professionals who have had practice with psychotherapy, but all other people are also welcome.

I have to add that I'm not pessimistic about the resolutions of these questions even by the official psychiatry or psychology, (which may include future developments on the field). I'm new to this forum and I find these questions intriguing (I don't know if they have been discussed before), since I see the way psychotherapy pretends to cover ALL aspects of human life, which is an incomplete task today, but possibly a reachable ideal?. This, as I said before, touches all topics in Anthropology and has serious consequences, which probably are not completely explored.

HI katze,

I can give you suitable answer of your question. I am feeling that they are more imp. to understand those ones. ok, let me tell you what i want. Psychology will remain ahead of philosophy, this has one reason and it is psychology means to look into one's mind and their thoughts. Look into their heart to know what is going on. Other side, philosophy can't do that. It demands for thinking. Though thinking is imp. in our life, but it seems incomplete. Thinking needs action and always keep in mind the command of action comes from mind... So this is the biggest difference between psychology and philosophy.

Normal personality, according to me it can't dazzle anyone. It is difficult, too, to understand and getting it by real. There should be thing like personality in our life, cause it plays a big role for our character building, it can help you a lot in every field of life.

Any queries about my post, please tell us freely.

Personally, I don't believe in this "normal." When people say it what they mean is: they are normal, you are not.

Worse: people who use it assume that "normal" is actually "healthy." Is it not conceivable that many people are mentally unhealthy but are considered "normal" anyway?

I'm a bit pressed for time. I'll elaborate on this later.

Normalcy in the area of mental health is based on trends and patterns in society I think.

Psycholigists observere most peoplel behaving in a certain manner in response to any number of situations. Those that don't behave the same way as those in this large statsitcal group which dominate the pack fall into the 'abnormal' catgeory.

If you buy a pack of M&M's and find one that looks like a Chocolate Kiss, that's not normal. Not because there is something bad about being a Kiss, but they don't exhibit the same properties of the M&M's, so they are classified as an abnormal M&M.

"Normal" depends on the point of origin, the point of view of someone influential enough to affect social scripts. If a schizophrenic but charismatic man has enough fans, pretty soon we'll all be living in his world and reading the New Testament.

I'll probably spend some time in Hell for that. But that's normal, right?

It's all a spectrum.

Really, its a chaotic soup and the peas feel differently about it than the broth does.

Normal has as broad a range as abnormal.

Cacti grow in the snow and fish swim deserts.

So what is normal?

Normal is also shifting.

Apple trees have no leaves in winter and caterpillars transform to moths.

Normal? Ha!

Moss

What's normal varies from time to time and from place to place. There are fads in psychology as well as everywhere else, and only time will tell what's just a passing fad and what's actual progress. What I mean by normal is this: capable of loving, working, and adapting constructively to changing conditions and different people.

narayan wrote:What's normal varies from time to time and from place to place. There are fads in psychology as well as everywhere else, and only time will tell what's just a passing fad and what's actual progress. What I mean by normal is this: capable of loving, working, and adapting constructively to changing conditions and different people.

I think THAT is a timeless definition of normal, and also my favorite.

Normal requires rational thinking a positive attitude.

I don't think it's up to psychology to define "normal". It is the intersection of sociocultural, economic, etc forces in a particular time and place that defines normal. Psychology follows suit. Think of the gay movement. It wasn't started with psychology.