To me, that's the same sort of logical cop-out as when someone says, "well we can never really KNOW anything 100%". Ultimately true, but logically unhelpful - it ends all discussion yet misses the point. We only have "normal" under the system of categorization that we've created, just as we only "know" things under a similar system. So the issue is, within that system, is our understanding of normality comparable to our understanding of individuality?
Is normality preferable to individuality?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
To me, that's the same sort of logical cop-out as when someone says, "well we can never really KNOW anything 100%". Ultimately true, but logically unhelpful - it ends all discussion yet misses the point. We only have "normal" under the system of categorization that we've created, just as we only "know" things under a similar system. So the issue is, within that system, is our understanding of normality comparable to our understanding of individuality?