An examination of normality

Abstract This project seeks to examine the ubiquity, authority and power of the word and concept of ‘normality’. We examine different understandings of the word and how these understandings melt together and confuses the concept, thus creating paradoxical circumstances and misunderstandings. This is examined through Peter Cryle and Elizabeth Stephens discursive historical genealogy of the word normal. Furthermore, we seek to comprehend consequences for the individuals who are defined as ‘abnormal’. We have illuminated this focus by introducing Michel Foucault and Erving Goffman’s theories on power, discipline, categorizing and stigma. We exemplify how norms and definitions of the normal is being expressed in two concrete communication situations from the radio show Mads & Monopolet. We examine this by using Niels Åkerstrøm Andersen’s semantic analyzing strategy based on Niklas Luhmann’s theory on social systems, communication and second order observation. Our analysis suggests that norms, and how the normal is defined, is being negotiated in communication situations and constitutes the possibilities of what is accepted to utter in the concrete communication situation. Finally, we conclude that norms and expectations are necessary for humans to engage in meaningful interactions. We suggest however, that a possible solution to ease the confusions and consequences would be for anyone who uses the word normal to explicate and elaborate which understanding is being used. Moreover, an extension of the understanding of the normal as relativistic and therefore not a normative constitution of right or wrong, combined with a mutual acknowledgement and accept of norms not followed by one self, would ease consequences such as stigmatizing, expulsion and discrimination