Think for yourself, not about yourself

.Shane.

Take it like a voter
Retired Moderator
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
9,233
Location
NorCal
One of the biggest aggravations to me on this forum is the self-stereotyping that I constantly see. The arguing over how so-and-so is truly a Christian or a conservative or anarcho-communist or whatever. This stampede to pigeon hole yourself.

I see this as debasing discussion because rather than arguing the point or question at hand, people jump to knee jerk assumptions based on how have (usually voluntarily) self-labeled ourselves.

I'd wager that all discussion would be significantly elevated if we stopped this practice. If you didn't say "as a socialist blah blah blah" then people would be more likely to look at the quality of your comment. I very consciously avoid such labeling when I post (unless is specifically relevant to the point being made. IE if you were discussing baseball rules and you had experience umpiring, it useful to point this out) because I want to engage on the level of the idea and not the stereotype of the person. But that's not the point of this thread.

Ok, enough w/ the back story.

While I've always known this, it finally sunk in (maybe I was weary of being annoyed) that the main reason for this is that this forum is populated by a fairly young population and young people, as a rule, are in a mode of self-reflection, forming identity, etc... Now, I always found the irony that as we strive for individuality that we attack it in others to be interesting, but its not particularly helpful.

And, in so reflecting, I realized that if I was an 18 year old posting here, I would very likely be doing a lot of this same type of self-pigeon holing. At that age, there was no internet, no forums, but I spent an inordinate amount of time in a kind of self pyschoanalysis were I thought through how I thought I should act based on my beliefs or those things I wanted to believe.

Finally, I realized that I had to get out of this phase. That what I was doing was just spinning my wheels, thinking about myself. It was becoming a narcissistic exercise in paralysis by analysis.

So, I decided to stop thinking about myself and start thinking for myself. Rather than wondering how I should act in situation XYZ, I just acted. I held to a few tenets (means) and didn't care about the ends. Rather than thinking "I want to be honest, how does an honest person act?" I just decided to BE honest and trust where that would lead me.

Its a long process and one that at times does require reflection and a short trip back to the "thinking about myself" phase, but I became much happier and, overall, more confident and comfortable with myself and the direction of my life.

So, I offer this post as a mea culpa to the youngsters here. I'll try and be less judgmental and more understanding. But, I want anyone who finds value in this post to realize that you can rise above where you are at and it doesn't require a constant mental flagellation that you're not a true this or that. Be your own person. Define your own terms. Be an individual. Think for yourself, not about yourself.

**Please only reply if you care to contribute to a useful discussion. Thanks**
 
I would, but I'm a socialist :dunno:
 
It's really the opposite problem in the majority of cases. Yes, in some instances it would help to not say "As a <blank> my view on the issue is this," but also in many of these instances part of the problem is posters who already know each other's views are going to accuse each other of bias anything.

It's far, far more common for a person to make a post without claiming anything about themselves, and then get called a communist or fascist or whatever incorrectly anyway.
 
Realpolitik for me. Does my opinion fit my political views? Great if it does. If it doesn't, still fine.

While pigeonholing doesn't work, latent labeling works wonders. It is useful to keep track what side people tend to take on issues for future refrence so I can prepare for it.
 
I label myself. But I don't think that makes me part of a group, because currently pretty much no one agrees with me on anything.

It's not just an issue here. It's an issue in the country: If you are an X, you much believe Y. If you don't believe Y, you can't be an X.
 
Shane, welcome to Objectivism :)

:rotfl: The hell are you talking about? Objectivists are possibly the most guilty of this out of all of them!

 
I'd say people do this on this forum either for: a.) trolling purposes (see: Karalysia), or because they are incapable of forming their own opinions, and find it much easier to just hop on some bandwagon or other, especially if that bandwagon is off the beaten track.
 
Mofos been labeling & stereotyping me my whole life, I really don't care much to stereotype myself, for the most part I try to reply simply as me rather than as "an environmentalists" or "anti-corporatist" or "anti-smug twit" or "pro-sensibleness" or "pro-fresh air" or whatever. Like Walt Whitman I am large & contain multitudes.

See my title. That's the way I roll. :)
 
:rotfl: The hell are you talking about? Objectivists are possibly the most guilty of this out of all of them!


Not to mention that I have yet to see an "objectivist" either make and objective argument or take an objective view of the world.
 
I confess, I harbor a secret distaste for people who complain about labels and descriptors, who insist that their views are too special and unique to be categorized, or go on about how labeling and categorizing people's views just makes people stupid. There's a host of good reasons for labeling that go along with all the bad stuff.

Anyways, it's not really rational, sense I haven't noticed these kind of people to be particularly more or less insightful than other people, it's just a pet peeve. Some of them are idiots, and some of them are really smart dudes/dudettes.
 
I confess, I harbor a secret distaste for people who complain about labels and descriptors, who insist that their views are too special and unique to be categorized, or go on about how labeling and categorizing people's views just makes people stupid. There's a host of good reasons for labeling that go along with all the bad stuff.

Anyways, it's not really rational, sense I haven't noticed these kind of people to be particularly more or less insightful than other people, it's just a pet peeve. Some of them are idiots, and some of them are really smart dudes/dudettes.

I can agree with that.

I label myself to be part of a group, something larger than myself... everyone needs community, even anti-socialites like myself.
 
I confess, I harbor a secret distaste for people who complain about labels and descriptors, who insist that their views are too special and unique to be categorized, or go on about how labeling and categorizing people's views just makes people stupid. There's a host of good reasons for labeling that go along with all the bad stuff.
There are a lot of good reasons to label but that's not why most people do it, most people do it because they're too lazy to actually think.

Anyone's views could be special & unique but instead most find a system of beliefs that makes them feel comfortable & bandwagons on that. Everyone does that to some degree, I mean you can't analyze every issue & every value you hold but I always find it cool when people take views outside their party line as opposed to just giving the predictable kneejerk response than fits with their typical modus operandi. Frankly, it's that unpredicatableness that makes humans interesting & everyone has it to some degree. Some nurture it, some overembellish it to appear extra-special (when actually they may not really understand/believe-in anything), many are afraid of it, afraid to appear wishy-washy or flip-floppy but, IMO, it's what separates us from zombies/robots.
 
Ayn Rand, you're either a comedy genius, or something else :)

.Shane. I agree this self-pigeonholing is a result from the amounts of information people have to digest and have opinions on. With the interwebs and all other avenues of getting this information, I am suddenly supposed to have an opinion on for instance A mosque, Koran burning, Homosexuality, DADT, Atheism/Theism, Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, etc, und so weiter. And I have to have time left to sleep, eat, and play games. When I was a lad, I only had to have an opinion on which transformer I liked best and whether a "personal computer" was as much fun as the C 64. Instead of really considering the issues and forming an opinion, it's more time efficient to be able to request your opinion based on your self-identified, pigeon-hole.

It's an unfortunate side effect of this information overload, but I'm confident we'll evolve our thought processes to ... aw, who am I kidding? It'll only get worse.
 
My biggest problem with labels, personally, is how I don't quite fit them.

I mean, religion, there is no question what I should call myself. I am a card-carrying Mormon - literally, I have a card I keep in my wallet. Of course, for other people the issue is nowhere near as cut-and-dry. And even then, you can't extrapolate everything I think from that fact.

But politics? Much different. I suppose that on balance I lean towards the right (as defined by American politics; I am an American and if I am going to be labeled at all, I should sue the American ones), but saying that won't give anyone much insight into what I actually think on any given issue. I mean, I agree with liberals on some issues (such as immigration) and fall somewhere in the middle on others (such as gay marriage) - and for me, "falling in the middle" doesn't mean so much "looking at both sides and then deciding to straddle the fence" as "forming an opinion, based on what I think is the right way, then noticing that those who disagree with me do so in two different directions".

And I imagine most people are the same.
 
.Shane. said:
that the main reason for this is that this forum is populated by a fairly young population and young people, as a rule, are in a mode of self-reflection, forming identity, etc...

Good point, I've made that observation a while ago and decided that if I post my opinion on something and it immediately gets attacked by 10 people, that my job is not to lash out against the adolescents but to try to explain myself to them. If they are not mature enough to process the information that is their problem not yours.


.Shane. said:
I always found the irony that as we strive for individuality that we attack it in others to be interesting, but its not particularly helpful.

Agree 100%. Another common trait of those young people you mention. By bashing others for their individuality they make their own insecure selves secure.
 
Well, sometimes when I'm thinking about whether I should conform to a label or if I should use a label to describe myself, I ask, "what would Jesus do?".

In other words, a person can try to conform to a label if they're of the opinion that the label's viewpoint is actually correct - and that their own personal viewpoint is probably incorrect.
 
With the exception noted above, I doubt that anyone thinks "I'm going to think this because that's what I'm supposed to believe." Instead, most people seem to be of the "This person says really smart stuff about the topics I'm familiar with. And now he's talking about other stuff! He's probably right about that stuff two." persuasion.
 
Good point, I've made that observation a while ago and decided that if I post my opinion on something and it immediately gets attacked by 10 people, that my job is not to lash out against the adolescents but to try to explain myself to them. If they are not mature enough to process the information that is their problem not yours.

Agree 100%. Another common trait of those young people you mention. By bashing others for their individuality they make their own insecure selves secure.

Yea all this is possible. More likely though, you just have a set of obnoxious, unjustifiable beliefs that you hate to see torn down. So you erect this false edifice of what you imagine your opponents to be, aka "adolescents" who are "not mature enough".
 
Top Bottom