There is in fact a direct line from this book to cyberpunk. Samuel Delany has said that when he started writing one of this goals was to create that same sense of wonder that Bester’s novels had inspired in him; and William Gibson similarly avowed the influence of Delany’s great ’60s SF writing. QED.

Regarding your question, I used to say "everybody is normal until you meet them."

This came up recently as I was discussing with someone the new edition of the DSM coming out soonish. "Normalcy" is a mongrel concept and has suffered greatly from being reduced by clinical psychologists (and society as a whole) from a normative question to a statistical one. This is deeply problematic and begs the question of whether the concept has any merit in it at all.
A lot of behavior today deemed “normal” was once considered outlandish (and certainly the opposite is true as well). If normalcy is simply a statistical question, then it is a capricious concept, and therefore cannot be a standard.

With no standard, who is to say what is a “quirk” or mental illness and what isn’t?

I can see Michel Foucault and Humpty Dumpty agreeing: “The question is, which is to be master — that’s all.”

I was waiting for the day you’d cover him for All Tomorrows… and I’m delighted that day has finally come!

I have to say, I read The Demolished Man and Stars My Destination at the same time, one right after another. Although I remember enjoying The Demolished Man tremendously, and I remember the general theme of it being a sci-fi noir with telepathy, I don’t really remember much besides. Stars My Destination, on the other hand, had a profound effect on me. To me, it is THE proto-cyberpunk novel. I loved Gully Foyle and his quest for revenge. I remember jaunting. And… oh my god… The Scientific People! “Quant Suff! Most scientific!” One of my favorite scenes of any sci-fi novel, EVER.

So I guess I should re-read The Demolished Man so that I can stay on-track with the discussion. Just wanted to share my enthusiasm for Alfred Bester in general. As far as your question goes, I’m not sure. Most people avoid/cut off people with obvious mental quirks, but the truth is, I think everyone is batshit insane in their own special way. Sometimes, it takes more time to figure out, sometimes it’s obvious from the get-go. So maybe we should all be more open-minded towards each other. The worst that could happen if you listened to “crazy” people more is that you’d waste some time – the best thing that could happen is that you could learn something new, hear some interesting story, make them feel like someone is listening. In LA, I had a strict policy of not engaging anyone “crazy” that started talking to me… no eye contact, no response of any sort, etc – but here in San Francisco, I’m in a more indulgent mood. The other day, I had a 20-minute conversation with a really strange man sitting next to me at a coffeeshop about heremetic rituals, geomancy, alchemy, etc. And why not?