Why is it normal to follow the crowd? The simple answer is because the majority of people choose to follow the crowd, and whatever the majority do is classed as the normal thing to do namely because normal is nothing more than the average societal practices that the majority carry out. The question is why do the majority of people choose to follow the crowd?
Well it’s not because people want to be normal, it’s because it is normal to want to survive and statistically speaking the best way to survive is by copying the practices which the majority of humans have found to be most successful in regards to surviving.
That is to say the crowd is the collective intelligence of the most successful humans on the planet which is inevitably why the crowd is most often superior in regards to providing the best practices for survival, which is why the majority most often choose to follow the crowd, because by doing so it gives them statistically speaking the best chances of survival.
So it is normal to follow the crowd because statistically speaking by doing so a person gives themselves the best chances of survival, and normal human behaviour is to want to do everything you can to give yourself the best chances of survival.
But this begs the question of whether any person who chooses not to follow the crowd is acting abnormally. The simple answer is, it depends. Like said it is not normal per se to follow the crowd it is only normal because the majority do so. So it is normal by the dictionary definition of normal not by this weird made up version of normal which modern society seems to have adopted.
The dictionary definition of normal is conforming to a standard, usual, typical or expected. What is normal under this context is defined by the law of averages, which as said is all normal is. For example, the average normal body temperature for a human is 37°C and the majority of people will have a normal temperature around this level; however, studies have shown that some people have normal temperatures as low as 36°C, while other studies have shown some people have normal temperatures as high as 37.2°C.
The people who have temperatures which deviate from the expected average are not abnormal in any way so long as their temperature is normal for them. That is to say their normal body temperature is different from the average person’s normal temperature but they are entirely normal because their temperature is normal for them. So even though their temperature is below what is deemed normal for the average human it is an entirely normal temperature. That means it is only abnormal under the context of it being different to the collated normal average human temperature.
Or rather normal human body temperature is defined by taking an average of the temperatures of large numbers of people. But that average is a collective average and is irrelevant in regards to what is normal for an individual. This means an individual’s temperature would only be abnormal if it deviated from the temperature that is normal for them. For example, if someone’s normal temperature was 36.9°C but it was showing as 36°C then that would be a non-normal temperature.
On the flipside if someone’s normal temperature was 36°C and it was showing as 36°C then even though it is a full degree behind the temperature that is deemed normal for a human, it would be an entirely normal temperature.
This means that the reason it is normal to follow the crowd is for the same reason the normal human body temperature is stated as being 37°C, because just like if you added up a large number of peoples’ body temperatures the average would show 37°C, if you add up the collective actions of all humans the results show that the majority follow the crowd.
But on the flipside this means that just as if a person’s normal temperature is not 37°C it does not mean per se they have an abnormal temperature, if a person does not follow the crowd it does not mean per se they are not normal.
So context really is key when it comes to normal. Normal under one context can be abnormal under another, and vice versa. But this begs the question what would be classed as not normal for humans. Again the answer really comes down to context, if the majority deem something not normal then under the context of the thoughts of the majority that something would be not normal. But just because the majority deem something not normal does not mean that that something is not normal under another context.
And this is really where the complexity of normal comes into play, and why it’s such confusing topic to try to break down and understand, under one context one person’s normal can be another person’s weird, but under another that weird at the same time can actually be entirely normal.
For example one person may believe that using standard moisturiser to moisturise their face is smart, another may think that instead using male sperm to moisturise their face is smart. The latter person would probably be thought of as weird by society but only because that person would be doing something that the majority do not deem as beneficial. But as both of the people involved believe that their moisturiser is best under one context both are acting entirely normally, and that is under the context of the human desire to find the best way to achieve their goal.
In this case the goal is to have smooth skin, and the reason it is normal for people to want to have smooth skin is because the majority have deemed that having smooth skin benefits their survival. If the majority thought that having smooth facial skin did not benefit a person’s survival than both would be deemed weird for wanting smooth skin. But because in this case one person is following a practice that is deemed to yield success in regards to moisturising their face, that person is seen as doing something normal, but because the other is deemed to be doing something that does not yield success, that person is deemed as being abnormal.
But again it really is all about context. For example, if it was not normal for humans to want to survive then there would be no humans because we would all be dead, which is why it is normal for us want to survive because the only people who are left are the ones that do want to survive. But still it is only normal because the majority of us follow this practice.
Therefore, it is only normal to follow the crowd because the majority choose to do so, and the reason the majority choose to do so is because the majority of people have decided that the collective intelligence is most often than not superior to the individual, but not always otherwise normal would remain static.
And that is of course why what is normal is forever changing, because people only follow the crowd if they believe that in following the crowd it will benefit them but if they find another way that will benefit them that involves not following the crowd then they won’t follow the crowd.
So it is not normal to follow the crowd per se, it is only normal under the context of the majority choosing to do so. And the majority choose to do so because it is normal to want to survive and statistically speaking the best way to survive is by following the crowd, but not always which is why normal is forever changing.
This means that what is normal today will not be normal tomorrow, and rather ironically the best way to survive is by getting ahead of the crowd by following individuals that have found better ways to survive. Because those better ways will be tomorrow’s normal.
Which means if you want to be normal under the context of acting the most normal a person can act the best way to go about it is simply to do whatever you think is best for your survival. If you think following the crowd is best, then do it because doing so will be normal, if you think not following the crowd is best, then don’t follow it because doing so will be normal. The only time you would ever be acting abnormally would be if you thought following the crowd was stupid but did so anyway.
But then if you frequently did that then that would be normal for you under the context of your past behaviour and therefore you wouldn’t be acting abnormally. And that’s because normal is simply a behavioural pattern of either an individual or a collective.
That means what is normal for you is entirely your own making and is based upon the decisions you make, what is normal for society is simply the result of the collective decisions that the majority of people make. The majority choose to follow the crowd and so it is normal to follow the crowd. But many individuals choose not to follow the crowd and it is entirely normal for them not to do so.
Which means it is only normal to follow the crowd under one context, and that is the context of adding lots of humans together and seeing what the majority do. This means what is normal under this context in reality is irrelevant to a person as an individual.
Meaning for an individual it is only normal to follow the crowd if that is what the individual chooses to do more often than not, if they don’t following the crowd would be abnormal for that person but only under the specific context of whether they follow the crowd or not.
That means yes it is normal for humans to follow the crowd, but the context it is normal under is completely and entirely irrelevant to a person as an individual. Meaning whether you follow the crowd or not has nothing to do with whether you are normal and not, namely because what makes you normal is of your own making. Therefore normal belongs to you, meaning you can make normal whatever you want it to be.
And if what you make as normal is copied by others, then the crowd will follow you and what you do will become society’s new view of normal. Which is why people always say it pays to be different.
With that said I am going to end this post here, because this post is becoming abnormally confusing which is the ultimate irony of normal. It is confusing as hell. But only under certain contexts. It’s down to you to decide which they are.
That’s all from me for today, stay safe!