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

261–270 of 321 posts

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#261

Post by flavius29663 »

glogla wrote: post #201
narrator wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was talking with people I consider to be very smart and intellectual. We were discussing the California propositions. They did not want to hear the specifics of the propositions. They only wanted to know which organizations were supporting which propositions. This is what political discourse is these days. Figuring out which team you're on based on what political influencers agree with you. Nobody bothers to unders…

I think that kind of works for negative case - if something is supported by Amazon, Nestle, or Chinese Communist Party, it's probably not something good for the people of the world. Not sure about the positive case - I guess if EFF supports something, it is more likely it might be good?

This is easily demonstrable to fail. Amazon, for all intents and purposes, supports the EV revolution, should we oppose it? The CCP invests massively in PV panel production, should we oppose PV ? I can find counter examples even from Nazis or the communists.

I think there is no easy win here. If you even remotely care about an issue, you should do a minimum effort to read about it from multiple sources. e.g. for American politics, I found that the quickest way to gauge where an issue stands is by reading at least CNN and Fox, because they are diametrically opposed, so you can kind of guess where the middle ground is. Reading more neutral and informed pieces could come later on, if I really want to dive in.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#262

Post by memling »

TomSwirly wrote: post #256
mkr-hn wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I stopped identifying as atheist when I realized most religious people I encountered thought that meant I wanted to outlaw their religion. I inadvertently put myself in a box with people who were the main association folks had with that word. Sometimes I want this effect so I can help change impressions. Like: furry and nonbinary. The goal then is to help bridge the gap between stereotype and the real human variety c…

> I stopped identifying as atheist when I realized most religious people I encountered thought that meant I wanted to outlaw their religion. After thousands of years of exactly the reverse, that's rather rich, don't you think? The vast majority of atheists would be perfectly happy to be left alone to their own devices. But in the United States at least, they are considered second-class citizens. If someone is so bias…

> If someone is so biased that they become angry at the simple mention of a very abstract philosophical stance like atheism, is it really a good idea to placate them by pretending you are something else?

I'm not sure what you mean by abstract here: does the idea of a very abstract philosophical stance that it has no (or little) effect on other people or the world?

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#263

Post by mkr-hn »

TomSwirly wrote: post #256
mkr-hn wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I stopped identifying as atheist when I realized most religious people I encountered thought that meant I wanted to outlaw their religion. I inadvertently put myself in a box with people who were the main association folks had with that word. Sometimes I want this effect so I can help change impressions. Like: furry and nonbinary. The goal then is to help bridge the gap between stereotype and the real human variety c…

> I stopped identifying as atheist when I realized most religious people I encountered thought that meant I wanted to outlaw their religion. After thousands of years of exactly the reverse, that's rather rich, don't you think? The vast majority of atheists would be perfectly happy to be left alone to their own devices. But in the United States at least, they are considered second-class citizens. If someone is so bias…

I don't feel strongly one way or the other re: the truth of existence, so it didn't feel like I was the right person to defend the label.

There was no placation. I like effective communication. They accepted me well enough once I chose to really say who I was rather than lean on inaccurate labels.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#264

Post by tomasdore »

From 'Immortality' by Milan Kundera:

"In our world...it is difficult for the individual to reinforce the individuality of the self...There are two methods for cultivating the uniqueness of the self: ...addition ...and subtraction. .... Let me put it another way: a mere love for showers can become an attribute of the self only on condition that we let the world know we are ready to fight for it." (Part 3 > Addition and subtraction - Pages 111, 113; Faber & Faber edition, 1991)

If you find Kundera's words make sense, then while PG may be logically correct, the impulse to add to identity is rooted in our own pride. It will not be easily beat: 'the sin of pride' (nowadays called egotism) is a strong, persistent force, that we have always struggled to hold in check, but has followed Man as closely as a shadow - which it may be said to be. It could even be seen as a shadow in the sense used in a 'Wizard of Earthsea', where the shadow is a threat, with its own intent.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#265

Post by SyzygistSix »

jimkleiber wrote: post #140
visualradio wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Identity is used to automate decision making, so less energy is expended on conscious thought, so less time is spent weighing pros and cons of each alternative for every daily decision. If someone is 'dog person' they have routine where they take dog for walks, with positive effects such as exercise, without having to weigh pros and cons each time it is performed. If someone is coffee person, they do not have to weig…

I appreciate how you framed this and helped me see how identity can help us streamline the decisions we make in what we do. I think identity can have a secondary effect of communicating to others those decisions we've made about what to do. For example, Someone: What do you do? Me: I give speeches. Someone: So you're a speaker? It can be a way to bundle a bunch of actions/beliefs/etc into something that is quicker/ea…

>The challenges may come in the disagreements we have about which actions belong to which identities.

This is where the benefits of using tools like E-Prime, a form of English language that avoids usage of the verb "to be" help me. Thinking about things in terms of e-prime allows me to realize that while using labels as a shorthand for more specific information is convenient, I lose specificity and precision, and begin to think in terms of identity when I use labels and think/speak in terms of what things are, rather than think in terms of what people or things actually do.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#266

Post by confidantlake »

flavius29663 wrote: post #261
glogla wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that kind of works for negative case - if something is supported by Amazon, Nestle, or Chinese Communist Party, it's probably not something good for the people of the world. Not sure about the positive case - I guess if EFF supports something, it is more likely it might be good?

This is easily demonstrable to fail. Amazon, for all intents and purposes, supports the EV revolution, should we oppose it? The CCP invests massively in PV panel production, should we oppose PV ? I can find counter examples even from Nazis or the communists. I think there is no easy win here. If you even remotely care about an issue, you should do a minimum effort to read about it from multiple sources. e.g. for Amer…

Great point. I also like that you look at both CNN and Fox. The one thing I would add to it is to look at additional sources. Ie for health information, look at journals, cdc ect. For economic issues, look at the BLS ect. Oftentimes the truth lies there and CNN and Fox just have shallow interpretations of it.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#267

Post by confidantlake »

lbriner wrote: post #207
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…

Maybe a major issue with politics in the current western view, is not that it is identity-based but that it is a large atomic decision. You either get everything from the Repuplicans/Conservatives/Right-wingish or everything from the Democrats/Labour/Socialist/Left-wingish. It is much easier to identity as broadly one wing or the other, so I will tend to vote one way even if some of my party's policies are terrible a…

Well put. And there are so many issues that it takes a lot of effort to even understand them all. So often you just say, well I care about / identify with my party on issues a, b, c so I vote for them. Issues x, y, z that I know little about I will support the party line because if my group says that is the way to go then that is the way to go.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#268

Post by SyzygistSix »

dmurray wrote: post #237
xyzelement wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

// “I’m a dog person, not a cat person,” and other such bizarreness. Why are people seemingly so drawn to identifying themselves as anything at all? This is a powerful concept. When I studied yogic philosophy, the teacher pointed out how our language biases us towards identification. "I am hungry" in English reads like a statement of identity, whereas "j'ai faim" in French for example means "I HAVE a hunger". The hun…

You may be interested in E-Prime, "a version of the English language that excludes all forms of the verb to be ". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Prime

I have found E-prime really helpful to me as a tool to ingrain the habit of thinking of things and people in terms of what they do, rather than what they are or how we label them.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#270

Post by SyzygistSix »

hooande wrote: post #205
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…

Identities are the basis of social communities. The idea of "The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you" is correct. But it ignores the fact that there is a minimum number of labels that all socially adapted humans must use to identify themselves. These labels can be religious, political, hobbies, character traits, etc. You may label yourself as an "intelligent person" or a "hacker". Other people…

One can still label one's self in terms of things they do rather than what one thinks they are.

Rather than label one's self (or others) as "intelligent", one can think in terms of they are a person who takes time to be thoughtful/analytical/measured/takes tim to view all sides of a situation.

Rather than think "I am a hacker", one can realize that they mean hacker as a shortcut (label) to mean they engage in DIY projects, or like to ae software, or like to automate things, or like to deconstruct software to find vulnerabilities, or like to deconstruct technology to use it for originally unintended purposes.

Labels are convenient and useful but it is important to realize they are only a shorthand and that they can cause confusion or hurt as much as they help.

Post reply on HN