 Normality theories can be understood as an alternative to the (definite and/or indefinite) exclusive interpretation of non-strict laws. The general idea of normality theories is that “cp, all \(A\)s are \(B\)s” means that normally \(A\)s are \(B\)s. They can also be combined with a comparative interpretation into normic-comparative law-statements such as “normally an increase of \(X\) leads to an increase of \(Y\) when other \(X\)-independent variables are held constant”. However, the normality accounts differ in their explication of the notion of “normally”. One possibility (suggested by Schurz 2001b, 2002, see section 8.1) is to explicate the normality condition in terms of a high probability of the consequent predicate, given the antecedent predicate, where the underlying conditional probabilities are objective statistical probabilities based on the dispositions of evolutionary systems. Another possibility (suggested by Spohn 2012, see section 8.2) is to explicate the normality conditions in terms of degrees of belief and ranking functions over possible worlds.