333. The curse of identity
I my treatment of identity in this blog (in item 8) I
distinguished between individual and collective or cultural identity. Note that
the term ‘identity’ entails sameness, in being identical to oneself, or
identical to others belonging to the same cultural identity.
It is becoming a curse how people take collective identity
as the basis for life, and for their outlook on society. The trouble with such identity
is that it is exclusive: excluding, judging, discriminating, rejecting those
that do not belong to that identity.
The notion of identity steps into the trap of
essentialism, which, I have argued in this blog (in item 10), derives from an
‘object bias’ in thought (item 29). That bias bases abstractions such as
identity, culture, justice, human nature, good and bad, virtue, etc. on
metaphors of objects in time and space.
Particularly catching is the container metaphor: one
treats a concept as a box in which something is in or out. Here: you have a
certain identity or not, and if you do that is because you partake in some
essence belonging exclusively to that identity. You are an Aryan or Jew, white
or black, male or female, member of a nation or not. You cannot be in two boxes
at the same time, or partly in and partly out.
As I argued earlier in this blog (item 209), an
alternative conception of identity might be that of a node in networks that is
more or less distant from other nodes, in terms of connections that are shared
directly or indirectly, yielding a notion of identities that overlap more or
less.
As I argued in item 265, individual identity is formed
in interaction with other people, and their being different helps us to escape
from prejudice and myopia.
I proposed that human cognition has adopted the object
bias as a result of a long evolution where adequate identification of things
moving in time and space was a prerequisite for survival. In present society it
is working against us, jeopardizing the survival of humanity.
Psychologically, and also as an outcome of evolution,
identitarianism arises from, and enhances, the ‘parochial altruism’ that I also
discussed in this blog (in item 205). Humans have an instinct for altruism
within their group, at the price of suspicion against outsiders.
In the notion of identity, I propose, parochial
altruism and the container metaphor form a vicious pair. You belong to a
identity or you do not, and if you don’t you are suspect.
We should try to loosen the noose of parochial
altruism with cultural means, extending the perceived boundary of the group, to
extend the reach of altruism, but we are doing the opposite, in the present
re-emergence of nationalism and other forms of identitarianism.
There are several ideas of identity formation. One is
that of the autonomous individual, emerging from the Enlightenment and
liberalism, as a footloose, cosmopolitan, hedonistic individual from nowhere
and anywhere. Another form is that of identifying with some single-issue group:
pro- or anti- abortion, white supremacists, black supremacists, gender
supremacists, animal rights activists, environmental activists, and so on. A
third form is identification with a nation’s mythical ‘blood and soil’. On the
whole, then, individualism is either supreme or it is lost in group identity. If
you are not black you carry the guilt of slavery, if not a female the guilt of
male domination, and so on.
What happened with tolerance, recognition and acceptance
of differences of opinion, race and religion, with empathy and solidarity
across groups, needed for democracy? That was found in forms of both liberalism
and socialism that now both seem to be in eclipse. Now, tolerance of other
identities comes to be seen as betrayal of one’s own identity.
There is more to identity groups becoming segregated
and inimical. I will discuss that in the next item.
No comments:
Post a Comment