Here is a video just on this topic from a practicing psychologist, which tells about various criteria of norm and pathology, about mental disorders and the peculiarities of their diagnosis.
ZY: I apologize for not setting it myself
You know, I do not want to overload you with unnecessary facts, laws, regulations, and so on. as long as you cope with your problems (anxieties or just fears that everyone has) without strain, without the injection of horse doses of alcohol or pills, without there ... I don’t know zhivodestvo and other terrible things ..
Then everything is ok with you. even if you speak out loud, like to swear on the Internet or watch hardcore porn. in the end, the reaction to stress is individual for everyone. It is worth worrying about yourself when you understand that you are not strong enough and you are not know what to do to help yourself.
In the most general sense, a mental norm is the absence of mental pathology. That is, if a person has symptoms of any mental disorder, this indicates an inadequacy of the mental norm. You can see the International Classification of Diseases ICD-11 (http://icd11.ru/psihicheskie-rasstroistva-mkb11/) or the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V), which lists mental disorders and their symptoms in accordance with the concepts modern psychiatry.
However, in itself the discrepancy between certain types of behavior and other indicators of the mental norm is not a sign of "abnormality" of the person himself. For example, you can tell if your blood sugar is normal, but we’re not likely to call someone with high glucose “abnormal”. Similarly, psychiatry can diagnose a particular disorder, but not answer the question about the "normality" of the person himself.
At the same time, when we talk about the mental norm, we must also take into account the problem of cultural relativity. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders explicitly states that “the boundaries between normal and abnormal behavior may differ across cultures” (DSM-V, p. 21).
Anthropological studies show that certain types of behavior that do not correspond to the ideas about the behavior of a mentally healthy person, in another culture can be perceived completely differently. The first and perhaps the most famous of these studies is Ruth Benedict's 1934 article "Anthropology and the Abnormal". Benedict studied North American tribes in which behavior that we might describe as paranoia or megalomania was not only normal, but socially acceptable. Subsequently, there were numerous studies (just look at the articles in the journals Transcultural Psychiatry, Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry, etc.), showing that mental norm differs in different cultures, in different communities and even under different circumstances.
In addition, ideas about mental health change over time. New disorders begin to be diagnosed, and some disorders, on the contrary, disappear from medical classifications (for example, homosexuality was a psychiatric diagnosis until the 1970s).
All this does not mean that "there really is no norm." , but the concept of mental norm is not universal and changes.
According to Article 10 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On Psychiatric Care ...", the diagnosis of a mental disorder is made in accordance with generally recognized international standards and cannot be based only on a citizen's disagreement with the moral, cultural, political or religious values accepted in society or on other reasons , not directly related to the state of his mental health.
Under "generally recognized international standards" here we mean Section V of the International Classification of Diseases of the 10th revision, which contains all mental disorders and behavioral disorders known to modern science. Conventionally, most of them can be divided into psychotic (arising for no apparent reason, accompanied by delusions and hallucinations) and neurotic (appearing as a reaction to certain external events).
Some psychiatrists are convinced that there are no mentally healthy people, there are only underexamined. This is partly true: we are not biorobots, we live and feel, and this cannot but affect our psyche. The question is that the psyche of each person copes with this in a different way: some have almost no stress, while others literally go crazy.
If a person is really seriously ill (schizophrenia, mental retardation, etc.), then it is unlikely that he will be left without the attention of psychiatrists and in the end he will get to where he may not get out until the end of his life. However, in the so-called. "small psychiatry", everything is much more complicated: due to the stressful conditions of life, many of us need some form of treatment and correction (usually psychologists and psychotherapists are involved in this), however, due to a number of prejudices, few people seek help, preferring to "be treated" alcohol, tobacco, drugs, etc.
In general, psychiatry is the most inaccurate area of medicine, and the concept of the norm in it remains as mysterious as the nature of schizophrenia. The task of each person is to provide themselves with competent help in the event of the appearance of certain symptoms of banal stress, neurosis and depression and not to bring the situation to such a state when the discrepancy becomes obvious.