Normal, for most people, is not something that needs to be attained; it is a starting point. The feeling of normal comes and goes, and it is normal not to feel normal.
We all have a fairly clear idea of what normal is – all of us, perhaps, except people whose lives have been so affected by trauma that normal eludes them.
Trauma, especially childhood trauma, can turn our interpretation of qualia from reward-based to threat-based. It may reduce our confidence to try new things, to explore new landscapes; trauma may cause us to cling to the landscapes with which we are familiar, even when they are not healthy (better a known evil than and unknown evil).
Feeling threatened all the time transforms “normal” from a starting point into a goal. All of us in the human landscape are traumatized in some ways, and we all have areas in which we look up at our idea of normal from below.
As far as the Qualia Quotient goes, reward-based individuals are less interested in a normal landscape than threat-based individuals.
Reward-based Normal: Interest 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Threat-based Normal: Interest 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
As for their participation in the normal landscape, neither really participate in it at all because whether we rise up to it or we sink down to it, (as the case may be) it is human nature that when we feel normal we find ourselves wanting to be special again, and not normal!
Reward-based Normal: Participation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Threat-based Normal: Participation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
None the less, neither of these are healthy qualia quotients, of course, for they are both out of sync and not matched in the middle (around 5, which is optimal).
Of course, it causes a lot more distress in the threat-based individual. Perhaps this is because the threat-based individual, despite a real need for change, has a more difficult time exploring the unfamiliar landscapes. There is perhaps a stronger attachment to familiar landmarks, which brings us to an important, philosophical point.
When we first begin to visualize and imagine qualia, we see it in its ideal form. The longer we concentrate on it, however the less perfect it becomes. The perfect hexagon, for instance, that pops into our mind soon morphs into a variety of different hexagons, perhaps of different colors, or different sizes or textures.
“Normal” is really only just another ideal. The reward-based individual does not dwell on “normal” enough for it to morph, while the threat-based individual does. “Normal,” then, becomes harder to get a grip on, harder to trust – harder to put one’s faith in.
The solution, apparently , is neither to focus on, nor to grasp at normal. Indeed, no qualia ought ever be understood as if it were an object, like matter. Qualia must appreciated as a phenomenon, like a sunrise, or a crow flying by at an opportune moment.
When new qualia appears it is as an omen, a fortune, a dream, to be made sense of through conscious ritualing – through play and experimentation. We need only discover if it works or not, as if it were a crumb to be tasted by a hungry sparrow.