08-02-2017, 12:00 AM
Watergaze, all I meant was that terms like norm are relative. For some, Tibetan monks can be a norm. Everyone has their own cultural norms too. We have norms and norms for everyone can be pretty different. So when you say norm, your norm is living in a country that bans GMOs. You're surrounded by health conscious people who care about the health of the masses. Your new nationality are even more awesome people as a collective norm. The Swiss education system is incredible. So your cultural are very different than my cultural norms.
My cultural norms encourage GMOs, we have nearly a quarter of our human population incarcerated, our pharmaceutical companies are causing more ailments than they treat (side effects are WOW), our citizens are more concerned over our Presidents Tweets than they are about childhood poverty and pedophiles. Like--I'm a fucking angel with regard to my norms. Judge me against the Swiss and I'm likely very dark and mysterious (aka devilish).
That's all I'm saying. It's all relative and your presentation of ideas regarding health and comparison was unclear to me. Hence, I was asking for further discussion. I was genuinely curious as to what you were using as a basis for "norm" and many other readers may not be aware of the origins you were referencing.
Tibetan monks are a norm for those in the spiritual circles. They just aren't your norm, I guess. They're not entirely my norm either, but they are a curious thing to study which sort of places me into that circle....which means my bar is set a few shades higher. Anyway, I now understand what you meant.
My cultural norms encourage GMOs, we have nearly a quarter of our human population incarcerated, our pharmaceutical companies are causing more ailments than they treat (side effects are WOW), our citizens are more concerned over our Presidents Tweets than they are about childhood poverty and pedophiles. Like--I'm a fucking angel with regard to my norms. Judge me against the Swiss and I'm likely very dark and mysterious (aka devilish).
That's all I'm saying. It's all relative and your presentation of ideas regarding health and comparison was unclear to me. Hence, I was asking for further discussion. I was genuinely curious as to what you were using as a basis for "norm" and many other readers may not be aware of the origins you were referencing.
Tibetan monks are a norm for those in the spiritual circles. They just aren't your norm, I guess. They're not entirely my norm either, but they are a curious thing to study which sort of places me into that circle....which means my bar is set a few shades higher. Anyway, I now understand what you meant.