Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by mgrthrow 1282 days ago
Would the author say, "I am a ..." and end with any of the above? If so, they identify as that group.

That's what identity is, it's the set of things you consider yourself to be. "I am" and "I consider myself to be" are very simple clauses.

How big or small a part you decide to make your identities part of your personality is up to you, but like, they are still part of your identity.
2 comments
kelnos 1281 days ago
The idea the author is talking about is explicitly not the "I am..." stuff. The "I consider myself to be..." stuff is what is important to his thesis that the "descriptors you hold dear to your self-image" (which he calls "identity", but I agree that can be an ambiguous term) can blind you to opinions and evidence contrary to what you already believe, and make it difficult (if not impossible) to have honest conversations about things.

I may literally be an average-height, average-build, bald, white man, but I don't consider any of those things to define me; they are not central to my self-image (at least I don't think they are; it's possible I've let some of that creep into my psyche more than I'd like). Yes, they are literally a part of my "identity", but not in the way that is relevant to anything the author is talking about.

link
mdp2021 1282 days ago
No, you are misunderstanding what is meant with "identification" in these texts. The starting point is PG's text.

It is about how "identification" clouds your judgement. If you can just describe yourself ("happen to be male") that is one thing; if when you think of yourself you cannot abstract from some attributes, there is where you have "caged" yourself.

link