There is nothing new about defining behaviors usually seen as psychotic as "normal":
And also -- the article didn't say these experiences were "normal". It fully recognizes that they are experiences are highly unusual, and typically quite distressing to those who experience them.
That's why a more nuanced discussion is needed.
Far from being an old and tired topic (per the shallow dismissal above) -- we're just getting started.
And in any case, obviously people don't get treated for the specific behavior (or experience, if you want) of hearing voices. They get treated for the behavior of complaining about voices.
i.e. Actual behaviour is not the expected behaviour. The experience is the trigger of said behaviour (or even lack thereof such as a lack of empathy or sympathy).
People aren't treated for covid; they're treated for complaining about their symptoms
They're not treated for anxiety; they're treated for complaining about anxiety.
They're not treated for migraine headaches; they're treated for complaining about headaches.
They're not treated for gout; they're treated for complaining about their big toe.
Anxiety is the only of your examples that's kind of similar, and, likewise, anxiety is highly amenable to cognition-based therapies.
Where does your brain end and you start? Does it make sense to have this distinction?
"Oh, it's just SO complex!" is the battle cry of the academic grifter:
we need MUCH more research! I'm writing my grant application right now.
And by the way, that wasn't a "shallow dismissal." I was carefully saying that this isn't a new idea.