Belonging
The lack of my camera cable has forced me to remember those days when I blogged about…you know, opinions and stuff, rather than just What I Did Last Weekend. It was, after all, the main reason I started a blog in the first place (yeah, ‘cause I need more places in which to unload my opinion onto the world). But somehow lately I have become lazy. Any thoughts I have are fleeting things, either kept to myself or shared in emails in between tv-related ramblings.
And the other day I was linked to a new blog of a friend from university, and it shamed me. She writes regularly of her opinion on current affairs, friends, things that happen in her day-to-day life, tv adverts…everything, really. And while I don’t agree with everything she says, I feel small in my little picture-book blog by comparison.
Also, nothing very interesting has happened recently. Although I have a photo of my father to share when (if) I find my cable.
So…in reading said friend’s blog, anyway, I came across this line:
“I do wonder how I can hold these beliefs, how I can be in favour of killing foetuses and the seriously ill or the elderly, and how I can oppose killing murderers and rapists. Those are the contradictions in being a liberal....I just have to believe that somehow I'm right.”
And it made me think. Out of context, that perhaps seems more imbalanced than it is, and I don’t disagree with anything she’s saying, but it raised the question of ‘belonging’ (notice how I jumped at the chance to use that title…) to any labelled division of people.
Now, I do believe we need labels. To make life easier for all of us, for a start. When describing a person, it is so much better to be able to say of me ‘she’s a liberal Christian fantasy reader’ than to have to list every single opinion I have individually. Approximations through a combination of labelled stereotypes will do, in the majority of cases – there simply isn’t world enough or time for us all to know each other perfectly.
But when it comes to your own view of yourself, I don’t believe anyone should base themselves on a label. I don’t believe anyone should ever think it is sufficient to say ‘because I am a Y, I believe X’ and think no further. (I am uncomfortable enough with ‘I believe X, therefore I am a Y.’) In the case above – yes, those opinions appear contradictory. So why should it be alright to shrug and say ‘apparently I have contradictory opinions, but plenty of other people have them too, so that’s okay’? I don’t think it is. I think if there is one thing that we should never cease doing, it is questioning our own view of the world, understanding exactly why we believe what we do and, if necessary, changing those beliefs – but changing them based on personal experience and a separate appraisal every time, not en masse because you’ve decided to vote for a different political party this week.
What am I trying to say? I share my friend’s beliefs in the above case. And maybe I haven’t thought them through thoroughly myself yet either – but it doesn’t mean I don’t think I ought to (some day, when I get a respite from trying to work out if I believe in a soul). Her apparent decision to trust that other people have thought those beliefs through and that therefore they are fine just sticks in my throat. I am a fierce believer in independent thought – never believe anything just because other people do, however comfortable it may be. In the end, abdicating responsibility for your own beliefs can lead to you following causes that you wouldn’t be following of your own accord, because the lure of belonging to a community is too strong.
Again – what am I saying? On a small, everyday scale, I suppose it’s that I hope I am strong enough to be different to my friends, even those whose approval I most want. Let the schoolgirl response of attempting to chameleon myself into what I think will be an acceptable form be left years behind me.


7 Comments:
I agree that labels/boxes are needed to describe other people. However, they stir up other people's prejudices and they could be totally uninformed. We can't just assume that a label is universally understood. Solution? More imaginative labels I guess. Ones that people haven't already decided upon.
"I am a fierce believer in independent thought – never believe anything just because other people do, however comfortable it may be. In the end, abdicating responsibility for your own beliefs can lead to you following causes that you wouldn’t be following of your own accord, because the lure of belonging to a community is too strong."
Oh dear you know what I am going to say to this is, don't you?
Where do "your own beliefs" come from in the first place? Other people. Of course, be willing to challenge them and let them go but do not think that because they are "your own" they are more worthy than anyone else's. If you see a community with benefits you want, I see no problems in surrendering a "self" that is made up of the beliefs of a community you no longer want to be a part of.
*grins*
Don't let's go here on blogger...
I believe in a 'me' independent of other people, remember...that's kind of where this post came from (amongst other things).
And anyway, I don't see why you can't take several beliefs from many different sources, apply your own reasoning to them and make your own decisions on them and come out at the end with 'your belief.'
Because apart from anything else your view poses the problem that the first caveman must have got his beliefs from somewhere...
But think of it this way... some people have individual beliefs like "there were no dinosaurs". Are they right to stick to these beliefs? Let's say that they cannot understand the arguments and so cannot make their own decisions. Should they not instead identify a community they trust (such as the scientific one) and follow their teachings?
Also, I feel that there is a lot of give and take in a community. You may not believe in celebrating birthdays and post counts but by george we make ya.
Poor george.
I think you'll find the dinosaurs person is in fact following a community he trusts, commonly known as fairly strict Irish Catholics...
Just to butt into the discussion -
I wouldn't say that labels are needed, as such... just that they're a useful shortcut. That can sometimes lead to problems if we fail to recall that different people define different words in different ways. As has been mentioned already.
And I think that people holding contradictory beliefs doesn't necessarily mean that they haven't thought those issues through - perhaps it means that they've considered seperate issues seperately, but haven't given great consideration to how they fit together. Am I spelling seperately right? I can never remember. I think it is possible to consider abortion & euthanasia apart from capital punishment, and come up with two opinions that appear contradictory - it depends on what values and beliefs the opinions stem from as to whether they appear to fit. So I suspect that the quoted example indicates that the writer has considered individual issues without giving careful thought to what founding values they're basing their decisions on. Rather than saying, I think THIS and THIS because that fits with my founding value A, they've said, I think THIS and THIS and I don't really know how that goes together but I guess I'll live with it. That doesn't mean they've based their opinions on following along with others, but maybe that they haven't worked out a way to give voice to their founding values.
And as to the following a community you trust... well, I've thought a lot about that issue as it relates to informed consent in the medical field. I suspect that doctors often don't give full information to their patients, because the patient doesn't have the background knowledge to put that information to correct use. On one occasion, I withheld information from a client that he badly wanted - with the approval of my supervisor - because I knew that if he had the information, he would act on it. The information in question was the name & contact details of a stuttering support group - I had attended the group, and knew that the other members tended to (a) believe that the involvement of speech paths in stuttering therapy was necessary, and (b) believe that stuttering did not need to be even assessed. Only one of about ten members had achieved partial control over his stutter, and I feared that if he attended, my client would think that therapy doesn't work. (incidentally, his speech went from unintelligible to perfect in ten sessions)
So. I also know that my own doctors have withheld or under-informed me at different times, which makes me feel, well, a little frustrated. But I also know that they have done that because they felt that they were giving me the best information. I trust them, but I also do my own research and discuss what I'm concerned about with them. I get conflicting advice from different medicos, and the advice I get from my surgeon frequently contradicts the advice I get from my specialist.
I don't quite know where I'm going with this. If you don't have enough knowledge to make a truly informed decision, going with one advisor over another tends to be largely a matter of which advice suits you more, not necessarily about who you trust more or which advice is right. Do I trust that my doctors will give me their best advice? Yes. Unfortunately, following the best advice of a community I trust has resulted in me needing half-a-dozen surgeries. And that's even though I was well informed about the potential risks.
Rian would go so far as to say that labels are not only unneeded, but dangerous.
As an odd aside - Rian's head is sometimes called George.
I disagree with labelling as well... if only because one description of someone does not equal the sum total of who they are. I am an 'animal-loving fantasy reader who supports green issues', but, while all of those things are true about me, they do not equal me. I'm more than that. I have complex feelings about each of those things. They're not enough to describe me.
I am heterosexual. That does not mean my life revolves around a pursuit of the opposite sex. Yet you often hear the word 'gay' used to describe a homosexual person in the context that that's all they are. That's it. They're gay... what else is there to know about them?
I am a supporter of animal rights. Stating that on its own could potentially lead to all sorts of false impressions of who I am, because so many animal rights activists give their cause a terrible name. I don't blow things up, or release domestic animals into the wild, or harass or threaten people who perform tasks on animals that I consider immoral. I take a more sensible, rational stand.
So yes... labels can be dangerous, I think. When I think of a person... Skit, to take a purely random example... ;) I think of the things that form a part of who they are, but I try very hard not to use labels. A label implies an absolute. While I think of Skit as a book reading train engineer who grew up in Scotland, I by no means use that as an absolute label. There are too many variables, and I don't think labels leave room for variation.
Post a Comment
<< Home