…and the last person you should apply them to is yourself. Labels are convenient, but they rarely inform alone. It’s impossible to create one, use one, or hear one without projecting onto it all your personal, cultural and tribal perspectives. And the sum of these is you alone, and no one else. So how useful are they?
We can’t be responsible for others, but how about ourselves? Instead of labeling myself, why not just say in the first place what I believe or don’t believe, or what I do or don’t stand for? But to do that, I have to know–deeply and clearly and incontrovertibly–what that is. That’s much harder that grabbing a label and pasting it on. Learning that, and learning to articulate it both to myself and to others, that’s work. And, it takes a committed listener to absorb it and try to understand.
No wonder we fall back on labels…
Do you have a problem with the labels: car, dog, planet, love, hate, war, … ?
Hey, Michael!
You make a good point, and one I actually considered. In the effort to keep these posts short, I leave out a good bit of what occurs to me, and something that came up here was the concept of what I finally called “categories” of things. The real problem in all of this is (1) the nature of language and how we use words and assign meaning to them; and (2) human nature, in that we load certain words (or, in this case, labels) with huge political or social meaning, then wield them like weapons.
You could say, as you imply, that labels are simply names for things. I agree, except that some things are concrete and can at least be physically examined and described: car, dog, planet. Others are abstract: hate, love, war. In practice, many names, whether concrete nouns or or abstract ones, are open to confusion and varying interpretations. Is an SUV or a pickup hybrid a car? Are wolves and foxes and coyotes and dingos dogs? How about coyote dog crosses? What is a planet anymore?
I titled my post poorly, and had even considered revising it retroactively. Instead of “useless,” I should have said dangerous or perilous or whatever. At the time, I was feeling a bit negative because of some discussions I recently had around atheism and related themes. So, my bad. Thanks for calling me on it.
I think what I was trying to get at was an issue you and I have discussed many times. In any discussion about either politics or religions, we have to define our terms (or labels) before we begin wielding them like clubs. Often, just trying to do that can exhaust your energies and the discussion. The concept of atheism, which sparked this and which I continue to explore, is a good example.
You are a self-described ecologist. Is the word “ecologist” a label? If not, then why not? The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy is replete with terms that require historical review of their usage and meticulous distinctions in order to unfold their meaning or meanings. If one studies and then assimilates discussions of such terms as “rationalist” or “empiricist” or “idealist” or “atheist” or whatever and subsequently concludes that one’s intellectual orientation is a specific instance of that comprehensively defined term, is usage of the term mere labelling or something far more expansive? In the mouths of some, virtually every term is a label; in the mouths of more knowledgeable folk, the term functions as a portal onto a vast ocean of meaning.
Michael and Michael,
I stand humbled by my poor presentation of this idea, including (maybe most of all) the title! Of course, labels serve a purpose, and of course my issue is with those who label both me and others (and themselves) as a convenient way of categorizing so as not to have to look further. The whole thing surfaced because someone kept trying to explain to me that I either am or am not an atheist. I was a bit frustrated when I wrote the post. But it remains true that we all project values and interpretations onto labels, and also that there are many who wield them like clubs.
Your (Michael Weise’s) final sentence, however, seems to state well the proper utility of labels: “…in the mouths of more knowledgeable folk, the term functions as a portal onto a vast ocean of meaning.” Used responsibly, as a jumping off point to further exploration, they are of course valuable. So, thanks.