On the other hand, phenomenology also allows the conceptualization of a fruitful demarcation between the field of normativity and the phenomenological concept of «normality,» understood as «self-evident feelings of orientation and familiarity». This concept of «normality» would seem far from being understood as a static or quantifiable category, but rather as a continuous process of normalization. Its relation to the normative realm, insofar as normality points to standards of success or failure or to the ideal of «optimality,» has been a matter of reflection by phenomenologists since Husserl himself. 

The relationship between the normal and the normative is thus open to various approaches: on one hand, it seems that the description of normality can never be free of implicit value processes and normative judgments. This argument is at the heart of most postmodern, feminist, and critical phenomenological theories, which show the historical and cultural relativity of norms and their emergence from specific performative discourses or constellations of power. On the other hand, the phenomenological concept of «normality,» in its connection with temporality, might open up a distinction between normality and the realm of «norms.» The discussion between phenomenological and poststructuralist conceptions regarding the genesis of normativity is perhaps one of the most fertile ones in recent decades. 

While historically normativity seemed to belong to the realm of ethical theory and was supposed to regulate moral conduct prescriptively, some interpretations place its operation at the deepest levels of perception and passive life, shaping from the limits of appearance the configuration of the «normality» structures of the world we take as completely natural (Husserl 1952; Merleau-Ponty). The phenomenological tradition seems particularly well-equipped to discuss and debate, from the diversity of its approaches and the polyvalence of its methodological applications, the intertiwning between the realm of normativity, the description of normality, and the fundamental structures of the lifeworld and the social world. These aspects have been widely studied within the relationship between the normal and the pathological in the field of medical humanities, as well as in the fields of aesthetics, political and social philosophy, or ethical debates. 

To encourage this research and in order to disseminate its results, the Spanish Society of Phenomenology (SEFE) organizes this conference, establishing the following congress lines: 

1. What is a norm, and how do we follow a norm? Contributions from phenomenology, anthropology, and human and social sciences.
2. Historical and systematic considerations on the phenomenological concepts of «normativity» and «normality.»
3. The intersubjective dimension of the concept of «normality»: political and ethical dimensions of the concepts of «normality» and «anomaly.»
4. Genetic phenomenology of normality.
5. Norms, objectives, values: hierarchy, distinctions, and convergences. Ethics and phenomenology.
6. The phenomenological concept of «anomaly»: the anomalous, the strange, the unsettling. Phenomenological possibilities of description.
7. Critical phenomenological perspectives 1. Normativity and normality in the sphere of embodiment: analysis and critique of «bodily normativity.» Health, beauty, illness, sex, gender, race, disability.
8. Critical phenomenological perspectives 2. Queer phenomenology? Freak phenomenology? Reflecting on the neutrality of the normal.
9. Normality as a medical, psychological, or psychiatric category: phenomenology, psychiatry, and health sciences.
10. Norms and style in art: aesthetic considerations on the limits of normativity.
11. The everyday, the normal, and the event.