True enough. One of my profs liked to stress the idea that there is no "normal" but rather only a "typical" person represented in psychology. Because the norm is based on a statistic and because what the majority does isn't necessarily good (think Nazi Germany or McDonalds.) Kind of thought provoking considering our choice of activity.
When you think in terms of typical rather than normal you are a bit releaved- the burden of statistical determinism is released and you are free to roam about the country.
For some reason his concept made a lot more sense then than it does right at this moment. I'd like to think that my experience in the "human experiment" as it is had enlightened me to the point where I no longer am certain of my certainty, a sort of nod to Decartes, the egotistical bastard! But really what is true is that the real life experience is much less clear than the crisp words read off of the textbook. Which is better? We probably won't ever know. But something deep inside keeps pushing, pulling and nudging each to seek his own piece of the pie as it were.
But we are egotistical, humans / Aren't we? We only know reality from a first-person perspective, so who could blame us? I mean damn. Are we not free agents?
As I settled down with thought I brought myself to natural conclusions that were neat and clean. Free of debries. I was happy, so I told myself. Then I resolved to begin it all against tomorrow- but I knew it was a lie.
I have no internal monologue.