I am a male. But don't necessarily support the majority male opinion.
I am a capitalist. But that doesn't mean I don't want the poor to do well.
I lean towards the Democratic Party in the US. But Protectionism sickens me.
I am an Atheist. But I have a strong moral core (in my humble opinion).
The poorly expressed point I was trying to make is that those terms are inadequate since they combine a whole bunch of issues that the hearer associates with the word that do not capture the truth.
So... I say, I am a capitalist.
The hearers framing says Capitalists don't want the poor to do well.
This may be true of some Capitalists. It may even be true of most capitalists, but it is not by definition what someone means when they say they are a capitalist.
Similarly with saying you are an Atheist. All that in fact means is that you don't believe there is a God, or that you attach such a low probability to the fact that there is a God, that for practical purposes you live your life as if God does not exist.
That DOES NOT mean you are not a moral person. Morality and belief in God are two separate concepts.
For a simple reason. If to be moral or `good' means to do God's will, then is God good? If so God does as she chooses because anything she chooses is good is not very satisfying definition. Therefore, morality even for someone who believes in God is an independent concept.
My problem with boxes is that it gives the false impression that someone believes something.
I say I am an X.
You think that X's believe Y.
I turns out I don't.
I don't have a problem with defining people, but it should be according to their ideas... not their class of ideas.
Maybe boxes are useful as a starting point, BUT they should be used carefully and cynically.
No comments:
Post a Comment