I say assign everyone a number from 0 to 100 for how well they match each of, say, 100,000 traits, plot it on a 100,000 dimensional graph, find the median, and draw a hypersphere of radius 15 around it. Within lie your normal people. Unless you throw together some looney science like that the notion of "normal" can only remain subjective. So in my opinion, "is there such thing as normal" is not the correct question to ask, because "normal" is just a word, and such a common one that no matter what lengths you go to, it will always be used to categorize people. There will always be such thing as "normal" insofar as people will always use it in that context. What I would then ask is "how could 'normal' be re-defined in the context of human characteristics such that it is actually useful?", as it is in most other contexts. Perhaps it cannot be.

-------
Truth Generator

Great people worry about the future of mankind.

~ Jelli1224

-------
"Don't expect to find the right person
if you aren't willing to let the wrong person go." (Unknown)