Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 321 posts

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#91

Post by runawaybottle »

reader_x wrote: post #78

If people cannot argue fruitfully about questions that are part of their identity (and I agree with this premise), then it follows that for one to win politically (or convert them), the trick is not to convince people that your views are correct, but rather to convince people that their identity is threatened and that them maintaining their current identity (whatever that identity may be—and perhaps vagueness is key…

Why are people seemingly so drawn to identifying themselves as anything at all?

Sheer scale. There’s so many of us, and everyone is mostly replaceable. Not just in the economy, but in everything.

The identity is the one flag in the ground that screams ‘I stand for something’. I’m upset at myself and everyone for bringing back high school into our adult world. The book bags adorned with band stickers, the clothes, the cliques, all making it clear in a superficial way ‘this is who I am’. Like a generation of adult Goth kids - we fucking get it.

It just seems like we have to grow up, over and over.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#92

Post by SavantIdiot »

Swizec wrote: post #42
earksiinni wrote: post #11

It must be nice to have the luxury of choosing to keep one's identity small rather than having a big identity foisted upon oneself by society, history, and the circumstances of one's birth.

Fun realization I made over the past 18 months or so after 6 years living in USA continuously: When you're white, you can't be an immigrant. This whole time I thought I was a plucky immigrant seeking a better life (economically). Turns out I was and am just white. Still grappling with this. Learning your identity was wrong is very discombobulating. On some level it feels like maybe I've been here long enough that I'v…

What is the question they are blue-screening on?

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#93

Post by barry-cotter »

Swizec wrote: post #42
earksiinni wrote: post #11

It must be nice to have the luxury of choosing to keep one's identity small rather than having a big identity foisted upon oneself by society, history, and the circumstances of one's birth.

Fun realization I made over the past 18 months or so after 6 years living in USA continuously: When you're white, you can't be an immigrant. This whole time I thought I was a plucky immigrant seeking a better life (economically). Turns out I was and am just white. Still grappling with this. Learning your identity was wrong is very discombobulating. On some level it feels like maybe I've been here long enough that I'v…

> Friends have repeatedly told me I'm not allowed to complain or comment because "I can pass". Feels like if that were true I wouldn't need to pass, but when I ask that question it's like their brain gets a blue screen.

“Friends”

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#94

Post by dnissley »

IncRnd wrote: post #81
dnissley wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it does, so long as one uses a sufficiently broad definition of religion (e.g. crypto, wokeness). Also my impression is that there was a spike of js hate ~3-5 years ago that has since subsided. I think it grew alongside the development of web applications, where more and more people who had little previous exposure to js were suddenly forced to confront it as some part of their workflow or other. Can yo…

> I don't think it does, so long as one uses a sufficiently broad definition of religion (e.g. crypto, wokeness). Crypto and wokeness are not religions in the actual sense of the word religion. It's a shame that people redefine words in order to change their meanings to fit what they are saying.

I suppose it's too soon to tell if they take off, but they seem to fit the bill to me: Priests, holy writings, dogmatic beliefs, original sin, etc.

As a way of bounding this definition, I don't think javascript would count as a religion. Although perhaps I'm not sufficiently tapped into that world to make the necessary parallels.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#95

Post by cjohnson318 »

dnissley wrote: post #73
bigdict wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No thread about Javascript will grow as fast as one about religion Seriously, this reads like satire now.

I don't think it does, so long as one uses a sufficiently broad definition of religion (e.g. crypto, wokeness). Also my impression is that there was a spike of js hate ~3-5 years ago that has since subsided. I think it grew alongside the development of web applications, where more and more people who had little previous exposure to js were suddenly forced to confront it as some part of their workflow or other. Can yo…

How do you define religion? And how does crypto and wokeness fit into that definition. I feel like you're using crypto and wokeness in a perforative sense, but I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt, and assuming you have a working definition that's interesting and useful.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#96

Post by lliamander »

reader_x wrote: post #78

If people cannot argue fruitfully about questions that are part of their identity (and I agree with this premise), then it follows that for one to win politically (or convert them), the trick is not to convince people that your views are correct, but rather to convince people that their identity is threatened and that them maintaining their current identity (whatever that identity may be—and perhaps vagueness is key…

The paradox is that people seem to need a sense of identity. You can't have no identity. And there can be some sort of psychological satisfaction that comes from sharing an identity category with others.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#97

Post by int3 »

TchoBeer wrote: post #48
int3 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can acknowledge your preferences without making them your identity, though. E.g. you can admit to yourself that you are attracted to a variety of genders without thinking of yourself as being queer.

A distinction without a difference.

Did you even read PG's article? It explains the consequences of identification.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#98

Post by cjohnson318 »

dnissley wrote: post #94
IncRnd wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think it does, so long as one uses a sufficiently broad definition of religion (e.g. crypto, wokeness). Crypto and wokeness are not religions in the actual sense of the word religion. It's a shame that people redefine words in order to change their meanings to fit what they are saying.

I suppose it's too soon to tell if they take off, but they seem to fit the bill to me: Priests, holy writings, dogmatic beliefs, original sin, etc. As a way of bounding this definition, I don't think javascript would count as a religion. Although perhaps I'm not sufficiently tapped into that world to make the necessary parallels.

Do all religions have a concept of original sin?

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#99

Post by geraneum »

You might not always have control over what identities you’re attributed to.

For example if you are an immigrant, based on your home country, you may have an identity assigned to you by the destination society even if it isn’t factual. You might ignore it and remind yourself not to care too much about it (try to keep your identity small) but when you have a harder time finding an apartment even when you’re qualified compared to a local, you won’t be able to ignore it anymore. Or if you support a certain president because of economic policy you’re assumed to be racist by some other group of people who might start to treat you like one.

You don’t always have the luxury and I think this is a big point missing from the article.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#100

Post by confidantlake »

IncRnd wrote: post #77

Politics are _meant_ to be understood by the common person, especially in the US. The Declaration of Independence and the Consitution were intended to be understood by regular people. This is so that there wouldn't be a political class, who believes the common person needs to be ruled. Too bad we have that political class, anyway, along with regular people who believe politics should be inaccessible to regular people…

The wealthy landowner leading the revolutionary army became king, erm I mean president, after winning the war. The guy who wrote the Declaration of Independence became ruler a short time after him. They could have decided against being rulers, but they didn't.
Post reply on HN