I don't like the term "new normal"

Watch
ryanwhitt443
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 7 months ago
#1
I find it extremely frightening that we should use this word, to describe the future. Why should we reverse the progress of society into a life that is marred by somewhat irrational fear, isolated, devoid of any joy or pleasure, when the vast majority of people will not die from coronavirus and will suffer a mild infection, if at all? We should demand the "old normal", and I am frustrated to see at how this term is not be challenged by anyone. We need the old normal back. I don't belive COVID is a hoax or anything, but I think life in the "new normal", won't be life at all, and I think we need to accept that inevitably, people may die of coronavirus, but these people may have died anyway. It may sound harsh, but is it really worth throwing away the progress of society, effectively ending life as we know it, in the hope that we avoid an infeciton? When in reality, we should be exposed to it (those who are safer) to develop immunity?
0
reply
Archetypally
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#2
Report 7 months ago
#2
The term is supposed to encourage responsible practices - we aren't abandoning a way of life or moving into the dark ages, we are just acting with greater levels of precaution until it is safe to return to 'the old normal.
1
reply
username402722
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#3
Report 7 months ago
#3
I think it has been overused.
1
reply
Fonzo
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#4
Report 7 months ago
#4
(Original post by ryanwhitt443)
I find it extremely frightening that we should use this word, to describe the future. Why should we reverse the progress of society into a life that is marred by somewhat irrational fear, isolated, devoid of any joy or pleasure, when the vast majority of people will not die from coronavirus and will suffer a mild infection, if at all? We should demand the "old normal", and I am frustrated to see at how this term is not be challenged by anyone. We need the old normal back. I don't belive COVID is a hoax or anything, but I think life in the "new normal", won't be life at all, and I think we need to accept that inevitably, people may die of coronavirus, but these people may have died anyway. It may sound harsh, but is it really worth throwing away the progress of society, effectively ending life as we know it, in the hope that we avoid an infeciton? When in reality, we should be exposed to it (those who are safer) to develop immunity?
That's a slogan, not a word. And what is so wrong with just normal?
0
reply
ryanwhitt443
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 7 months ago
#5
(Original post by Archetypally)
The term is supposed to encourage responsible practices - we aren't abandoning a way of life or moving into the dark ages, we are just acting with greater levels of precaution until it is safe to return to 'the old normal.
We are though. The human species, the human race, relies on people to have close contact? Perhaps I am taking things too extreme here, but theoretically, we cannot reproduce unless people aer cohabitating together. So in theory, if this was maintained indefinitely (and there is no one putting a date on when social distancing measures will end), the human race would die out. We can't do things like go to the pub, or even basic things like hug or kiss someone.
1
reply
black tea
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#6
Report 7 months ago
#6
(Original post by ryanwhitt443)
I find it extremely frightening that we should use this word, to describe the future. Why should we reverse the progress of society into a life that is marred by somewhat irrational fear, isolated, devoid of any joy or pleasure, when the vast majority of people will not die from coronavirus and will suffer a mild infection, if at all? We should demand the "old normal", and I am frustrated to see at how this term is not be challenged by anyone. We need the old normal back. I don't belive COVID is a hoax or anything, but I think life in the "new normal", won't be life at all, and I think we need to accept that inevitably, people may die of coronavirus, but these people may have died anyway. It may sound harsh, but is it really worth throwing away the progress of society, effectively ending life as we know it, in the hope that we avoid an infeciton? When in reality, we should be exposed to it (those who are safer) to develop immunity?
Is over 40,000 deaths in the UK alone not proof that life is no longer what it was before Covid?
Last edited by black tea; 7 months ago
0
reply
Archetypally
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#7
Report 7 months ago
#7
(Original post by ryanwhitt443)
We are though. The human species, the human race, relies on people to have close contact? Perhaps I am taking things too extreme here, but theoretically, we cannot reproduce unless people aer cohabitating together. So in theory, if this was maintained indefinitely (and there is no one putting a date on when social distancing measures will end), the human race would die out. We can't do things like go to the pub, or even basic things like hug or kiss someone.
Yes, but we aren't maintaining it indefinitely, that is preposterous and nobody suggested that.
0
reply
black tea
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#8
Report 7 months ago
#8
(Original post by ryanwhitt443)
We can't do things like go to the pub
So this us why you are getting upset :rolleyes:
0
reply
username402722
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#9
Report 7 months ago
#9
(Original post by black tea)
Is over 40,000 in the UK alone not proof that life is no longer what it was before Covid?
A reminder- more deaths then from the bombs of the Nazis on the UK.
0
reply
ryanwhitt443
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#10
Report Thread starter 7 months ago
#10
(Original post by Archetypally)
Yes, but we aren't maintaining it indefinitely, that is preposterous and nobody suggested that.
But that's exactly the thing, the phrase suggests it will be. Why can't they just call it "living with the tempoary restrictions"? Sure, its less catchier but there is something that sends a shiver down my spine everytime I hear that phrase. It seems like "normal" has been everything pre COVID 19 and the "new normal" is some kind of new reality. If you read the governments 50 page plan they say nothing about things ever returning to normal. They say "as cloes to normal as possible".
0
reply
username402722
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#11
Report 7 months ago
#11
(Original post by ryanwhitt443)
We are though. The human species, the human race, relies on people to have close contact? Perhaps I am taking things too extreme here, but theoretically, we cannot reproduce unless people aer cohabitating together. So in theory, if this was maintained indefinitely (and there is no one putting a date on when social distancing measures will end), the human race would die out. We can't do things like go to the pub, or even basic things like hug or kiss someone.
I think we can manage without going to the pub (though many pubs sadly will close). Social distancing may remain for some activities but not all.
0
reply
ryanwhitt443
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#12
Report Thread starter 7 months ago
#12
(Original post by black tea)
Is over 40,000 in the UK alone not proof that life is no longer what it was before Covid?
But there is undoubtedly an overlap. Yes, their lives were tragically, and unjustifiably cut prematurely thanks to the diseaes, but these people would have mots likely died anyway - everyone dies eventually, but these people had life-limitign conditions. Despite the media hype when someone with seemingly no illness dies of it, these deaths are so miniscule they don't even compare to the people who die with covid who have a pre-existing health condition.
0
reply
ryanwhitt443
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 7 months ago
#13
(Original post by barnetlad)
I think we can manage without going to the pub (though many pubs sadly will close). Social distancing may remain for some activities but not all.
That was just an example - I'm not even old enough to go to the pub lol, I'm just saying a lot of our cultuer is being destroyed.

It willl be interesting to see if the BLM protests cause a spike. If they don't, perhaps there is a case for re-starting society without the 2/1 metre rule, and instead just ahve everyone wear masks, at least outside.
0
reply
Archetypally
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#14
Report 7 months ago
#14
(Original post by ryanwhitt443)
But that's exactly the thing, the phrase suggests it will be. Why can't they just call it "living with the tempoary restrictions"? Sure, its less catchier but there is something that sends a shiver down my spine everytime I hear that phrase. It seems like "normal" has been everything pre COVID 19 and the "new normal" is some kind of new reality. If you read the governments 50 page plan they say nothing about things ever returning to normal. They say "as cloes to normal as possible".
It's just basic rhetoric. Use a word like 'temporary' and people are less inclined to follow the restrictions. Use a phrase like 'new normal', people understand they have to make an adjustment in their lifestyle. There really isn't an argument to be had here, any assertion that the lockdown is going to continue indefinitely is just ridiculous.
1
reply
black tea
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#15
Report 7 months ago
#15
(Original post by ryanwhitt443)
But there is undoubtedly an overlap. Yes, their lives were tragically, and unjustifiably cut prematurely thanks to the diseaes, but these people would have mots likely died anyway - everyone dies eventually, but these people had life-limitign conditions. Despite the media hype when someone with seemingly no illness dies of it, these deaths are so miniscule they don't even compare to the people who die with covid who have a pre-existing health condition.
Those people may have had decades left to live.
0
reply
ryanwhitt443
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#16
Report Thread starter 7 months ago
#16
(Original post by Archetypally)
It's just basic rhetoric. Use a word like 'temporary' and people are less inclined to follow the restrictions. Use a phrase like 'new normal', people understand they have to make an adjustment in their lifestyle. There really isn't an argument to be had here, any assertion that the lockdown is going to continue indefinitely is just ridiculous.
Who knows. Judging by my instagram, most young people aren't following the rules. I can't even blame them anymore. The risk to the health of young people is honestly so low its amazing people have been overall obedient so far.

See look - WHO warns covid-19 may never go away https://www.france24.com/en/20200514...-never-go-away

I'd like to think if that was the case we'd just end restrictions and accept it as endemic like HIV, AIDs or influenza, but I have a feeling we will be indefinitely locked down in one way or the other. TBH though I'd hardly call this a lockdown. It's just a largely confined existence.
0
reply
black tea
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#17
Report 7 months ago
#17
(Original post by ryanwhitt443)
Who knows. Judging by my instagram, most young people aren't following the rules. I can't even blame them anymore. The risk to the health of young people is honestly so low its amazing people have been overall obedient so far.

See look - WHO warns covid-19 may never go away https://www.france24.com/en/20200514...-never-go-away

I'd like to think if that was the case we'd just end restrictions and accept it as endemic like HIV, AIDs or influenza, but I have a feeling we will be indefinitely locked down in one way or the other. TBH though I'd hardly call this a lockdown. It's just a largely confined existence.
We won't be indefinitely locked down but we might need to use measures like continuing to socially distance and wearing face coverings.
0
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#18
Report 7 months ago
#18
(Original post by ryanwhitt443)
We need the old normal back.
We don't need it. You want it. That's different.



And, btw, "those people may have died"? What planet are you ok that most people are immortal and might not have died?
0
reply
ryanwhitt443
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#19
Report Thread starter 7 months ago
#19
(Original post by black tea)
We won't be indefinitely locked down but we might need to use measures like continuing to socially distance and wearing face coverings.
That's the thing. "Socially distanced" society juts can't work. How can we socially distance when having sex, comforting people, helping people up from the floor...we can't even teach rpoperly. Our society relies on human interaction; social distancing has to be abandoned, it cannot be indefinite.
0
reply
ryanwhitt443
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#20
Report Thread starter 7 months ago
#20
(Original post by Drewski)
We don't need it. You want it. That's different.



And, btw, "those people may have died"? What planet are you ok that most people are immortal and might not have died?
Most people want a return to how things were. Because this isn't a life I want to live. It's not life. How am I suppoesd to have a relationship, see more than one family member up close etc, do anything worthwhile socially distanced?

I'm saying those people may overlap with the 600K+ people who die every year in this country. We simply don't know yet. But why not just shield the vulnerable and release everyone else? Build up immunity etc. Herd immunity, for all the criticism the government has got for initally pursuing it, is the only sustainable strategy. We better just hope the pandemic dies out like SARS, which I have to admit I am increasingly optimistic about.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you have the space and resources you need to succeed in home learning?

Yes I have everything I need (256)
56.89%
I don't have everything I need (194)
43.11%

Watched Threads

View All