Labels

[juderodney]

<p>1.  The guy's labeling people as violent who don't think like him.  That's judgmental.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>2. Geography is one of the driving forces in societal and cultural development.  </p>

<p> </p>

<p>3.  Let the black guy from Spain label himself.  If he becomes an American citizen, then I'll just be content to call him an American.</p>

Edited February 19, 2013 by Dark0ne

[juderodney]

 

In short: NO!! It is from those differences that such a great variety of good ideas came from. Removing such differences would severely limit the scope those ideas would have.

Being different does not cause war. It's thinking that others' differences are inferior or a threat that does so.

 

Btw that first sentence of his seems rather judgemental.

What part of the following statement did I get it wrong. In my opinion the word Judgmental is a politically correct phrase which has no value.

>I know from history that human beings social and politically have

evolved from Hunter gathers, to tribal, to kingdoms, to nations and I

was wondering why we have always sought a way to divide us as human

beings, mostly according to the most superficial of reasons, other than

to unite us for the betterment of the species.

 

You are claiming that without using labels which exclude human beings from other human beings that good ideas would not be exchanged. How is this then that there are 1000's of anonymous users, some on this very site who doesn't define themselves by any label other than their user name. How then can we exchange so many ideas without knowing who calls who what?

 

I think you are getting Geography mixed up in topic which has nothing to do with where you were brought up. A black man, raised in Spain , who migrates to America. Is he a black man? Is he a Spaniard? Is he an American? Is he an African-American? A person may have a different perspective based on where he grew up, but does his origin define him as a person or does his character?

 

 

Wow! that last post of mine came out weird! Here's what I was trying to say:

 

1. The guy's labeling people as violent who don't think like him. That's judgmental.

 

2. Geography is one of the driving forces in societal and cultural development.

 

3. Let the black guy from Spain label himself. If he becomes an American citizen, then I'll just be content to call him an American.

[kvnchrist]

 

 

In short: NO!! It is from those differences that such a great variety of good ideas came from. Removing such differences would severely limit the scope those ideas would have.

Being different does not cause war. It's thinking that others' differences are inferior or a threat that does so.

 

Btw that first sentence of his seems rather judgemental.

What part of the following statement did I get it wrong. In my opinion the word Judgmental is a politically correct phrase which has no value.

>I know from history that human beings social and politically have

evolved from Hunter gathers, to tribal, to kingdoms, to nations and I

was wondering why we have always sought a way to divide us as human

beings, mostly according to the most superficial of reasons, other than

to unite us for the betterment of the species.

 

You are claiming that without using labels which exclude human beings from other human beings that good ideas would not be exchanged. How is this then that there are 1000's of anonymous users, some on this very site who doesn't define themselves by any label other than their user name. How then can we exchange so many ideas without knowing who calls who what?

 

I think you are getting Geography mixed up in topic which has nothing to do with where you were brought up. A black man, raised in Spain , who migrates to America. Is he a black man? Is he a Spaniard? Is he an American? Is he an African-American? A person may have a different perspective based on where he grew up, but does his origin define him as a person or does his character?

 

Wow! that last post of mine came out weird! Here's what I was trying to say:

 

1. The guy's labeling people as violent who don't think like him. That's judgmental.

 

2. Geography is one of the driving forces in societal and cultural development.

 

3. Let the black guy from Spain label himself. If he becomes an American citizen, then I'll just be content to call him an American.

 

 

 

I would like to ask how a determination of another persons actions is any more judgmental as someone calling another person judgmental. This idea of being nonjudgmental is to me just argument as the use of labels.

 

I would think that the driving force behind any change would be ideas rather than areas.

[juderodney]

Different areas mean different terrain, climate, resources, etc. Those things went a long way in influencing how societies developed. They also went into how ideas were formed.

 

As far as being judgmental is concerned, I'm calling one man's words into question. He's labeling billions of people as violent because of how they see themselves.

[Nintii]

Yes well the same guy ... Krishnmurti ... also said and I quote;

 

"A consistent thinker is a thoughtless person, because he conforms to a pattern; he repeats

phrases and thinks in a groove"

 

You see that's the problem with a lot of philosophers they all want us to be as weird as they are.

What on earth is wrong with a person who is a consistent thinker ?

What, should I think inconsistently ?

 

Most philosophers tend to think that social norms like individuality need to be scrapped

somewhere along the line, and that we should all conform and become part of some type

of hive mindset.

You are no longer ... a white, oriental, african female / male whatever ... no, uh uh, that

was back when you were still an unenlightened beast crouching and gibbering in the darkness

of your own futility, blinded by your individuality and cultural confusion.

That was when you were still "animal" and controlled by your lower nature but NOW, NOW my

dear fellow human you have been liberated.

 

Oh yes, now you are part of the NEW global mind, a global chain of humaness, "one love

one heart, let's get together and feel alright" as Bob Marley sang.

Yes, stretching across the vast expanse of our brave new world, we shall carry the torch.

Come and dwell in my light where ALL live happily ever after ... together ... right ?

 

Here we bedeck our brows with garlands of flowers and live in Utopiana.

You know, we are the world, we are the children kind of nonsense.

 

Next thing you know, as is always the case with this type of thinking, they create a one

philosophy which is always Communist Marxist mindset and communal way of living.

Bye bye stuff, bye bye creativity, bye bye prosperity, after all we don't want to upset the

equilibrium of our new society by our personal progression, hardwork and intelligence

now do we ?

 

No, we must all be the same ... to which I say ..................................................!!!!!

 

First they start to get you to doubt your individuality ... because being an individual is

bad ... and then they go for the removal of bounderies and barriers both cultural and

national.

And then they take your stuff.

No, I am who I am and what I am ... you can keep your oneness to yourself.

 

And if you try and take away my freedom of being me, then you're going to see

some real violence.

 

Edited February 22, 2013 by Nintii

[kvnchrist]

Yes well the same guy ... Krishnmurti ... also said and I quote;

 

"A consistent thinker is a thoughtless person, because he conforms to a pattern; he repeats

phrases and thinks in a groove"

 

You see that's the problem with a lot of philosophers they all want us to be as weird as they are.

What on earth is wrong with a person who is a consistent thinker ?

What, should I think inconsistently ?

 

Most philosophers tend to think that social norms like individuality need to be scrapped

somewhere along the line, and that we should all conform and become part of some type

of hive mindset.

You are no longer ... a white, oriental, african female / male whatever ... no, uh uh, that

was back when you were still an unenlightened beast crouching and gibbering in the darkness

of your own futility, blinded by your individuality and cultural confusion.

That was when you were still "animal" and controlled by your lower nature but NOW, NOW my

dear fellow human you have been liberated.

 

Oh yes, now you are part of the NEW global mind, a global chain of humaness, "one love

one heart, let's get together and feel alright" as Bob Marley sang.

Yes, stretching across the vast expanse of our brave new world, we shall carry the torch.

Come and dwell in my light where ALL live happily ever after ... together ... right ?

 

Here we bedeck our brows with garlands of flowers and live in Utopiana.

You know, we are the world, we are the children kind of nonsense.

 

Next thing you know, as is always the case with this type of thinking, they create a one

philosophy which is always Communist Marxist mindset and communal way of living.

Bye bye stuff, bye bye creativity, bye bye prosperity, after all we don't want to upset the

equilibrium of our new society by our personal progression, hardwork and intelligence

now do we ?

 

No, we must all be the same ... to which I say ..................................................!!!!!

 

First they start to get you to doubt your individuality ... because being an individual is

bad ... and then they go for the removal of bounderies and barriers both cultural and

national.

And then they take your stuff.

No, I am who I am and what I am ... you can keep your oneness to yourself.

 

And if you try and take away my freedom of being me, then you're going to see

some real violence.

 

Thank you very much for your take on things and your opinion on the aims of others. is there anything constructive to add to this?]

[Sync182]

 

Like any label, its result is defined by its usage.

 

Differences can be used to bring together - we are more than the sum of our parts. By drawing on the differences, and the resultant experiences, the whole can be improved. This is the way mankind should head.

 

Differences can be used to divide and destroy - united we stand, divided we fall. Highlighting differences in a negative way leads to angst and anger, which in turn ends up in violence. This is the way mankind is slowly heading.

Differences is another topic altogether. If two people are from a region, that doesn't necessarily mean that they are alike or even speak the same language. Look at the Tribal confrontations that have happened among people in Africa. Look at the Bosnian conflict. Look at the Arabs in Iran.

 

Labels are only given to define groups of people from other groups , not individuals. They are blanket statements that dehumanize the individual and promote an Us against them attitude. Point in fact the use of the term Gay in marriage, used to separate two people's wish to legally consecrate their lives together from other groups who have always had that right.

I'll both agree and disagree.

 

Yes, differences is, technically, a separate topic; however, as soon as you apply labels, you create differences. The two are intertwined. If there are no differences, why do you need labels?

 

It is the categorisation that goes into the usage of labels that highlights the differences behind them. And it is how the labels are applied that defines the results to follow.

 

Mankind has a long way to go before the need for labels - whether to define a culture or belief or identity - becomes outmoded. Only then will the underlying thoughts behind the quote in the OP become a reality.

Edited February 24, 2013 by Sync182

[rizon72]

Labels point out our differences, which we are. Its when you take that thought of I'm xyz, so therefore I'm better than zyx, that's when its violent in my opinoin. Our differences are our weakness and strength. Do not take them away because you want to be policitally correct.

[kvnchrist]

Labels point out our differences, which we are. Its when you take that thought of I'm xyz, so therefore I'm better than zyx, that's when its violent in my opinoin. Our differences are our weakness and strength. Do not take them away because you want to be policitally correct.

The term Political Correctness does not apply here. It's been overused by people who just want to remove the argument instead of dealing with it. Labels are both inclusive and exclusive. Those used to exalt or to degrade any group over another is the reason for the topic.

[MistTiger]

Gotta get in on this. As a avid student of history and its lessons, here are some thoughts.

 

1. Belligerence and intolerance are NOT a product of labels. Labels are a tool. It really just comes down to the basic primitive survival instincts of the prehistoric humans. This has always been about survival, in a situation where resources are limited, the strong will usually take from the weak to survive. If they don't, then the weak will not be as capable to survive as their stronger counterparts who have sacrificed themselves. If there are only enough resources for one human to survive and there are two humans, one will die. Now expand that. If I have resources but are not the strongest, it only makes sense that I band together with other of the same thinking as myself to protect my resources from those stronger than myself. This is the evolution of society from groups to tribes to nations. Together, we are stronger than we are alone. Now, why would i want someone in my group who does not think and act with the best interests of the survival of the group and its use of resources? It comes down to assets vs. liabilities. If you are an asset to the group, you have more leeway in dissenting from the group. If you are a liability to the group, at some point you will no longer be welcome in the group. Groups must have a way of identifying themselves to each others and to outsiders. This is a "Label". Labels can be symbols, words, items, even colors. Labels are not good or bad, they just are. They are tools. As a tool, they can be used for good or bad, just like everything else. I can use a fork to eat with or to stab someone to death with. Does that make the fork bad or evil? Should I now ban forks because they might be used for bad? Now, we try to ban labels that will believe are used for bad. Does that stop the group from adopting another label to identify themselves by. No, it is self-defeating and short sighted as it focuses the bad on the label and not the group. Wow!!! We showed that Hate group!!! We banned their symbol. Look. See. Problem solved. They have disappeared because they have no label anymore. LOL!!!!! GET REAL and wake up. That hate group is still there and if they are clever, they will hijack a new symbol from something common or important to everyone to thumb their noses at those who thought they could control them by taking away their symbol. What happens when some hate group starts using the copyright symbol as their label?

 

2. I love reading philosophers and their broad pronouncements on the meaning of life that others should follow and heed. Because those deep thoughts would not be possible without the protection of others and access to resources guaranteed by others. I have read Krishnamurti's statements several times and have come to the conclusion that it is a "statistic". A coach once said, I can't remember which which one, Winning and losing are the only tings that matter, statistics are how losers console themselves in defeat. Krishnamurti has just repackaged the message that the weak deserve to get what the strong worked for without working for it. If we don't label. If we don't group. Then there is no way to decide how to divide the resources and everyone gets a share. It's just communism restated. Same song, different tune. That commitment to mediocrity has been tried over and over in schools across the US. let's average everyone's test scores so that every will get the same grade and be equal. In the end, everyone always gets a failing grade. Without the incentives and benefits from scoring high grades (college, good jobs, success, etc.) there is no drive to succeed which leads to mediocrity and lethargy. Why should I put in the hours to study score an "A" on the test when the drug using deadbeat failing the class sitting next to me and I are going to get the same grade? There are a lot of you going to school out there, how do you feel about your grades being averaged and you getting an average job paying minimum wage just like the students in your schools partying through life? WoW!!! No labels, no division, we might as well be robots. Since a few of you probably still don't get it, I will simplify. Under Krishnamurti's statements, I who have posted no mods or pictures on this site, will now share all credit equally with those of you who spent hours working on your mods and pictures. Just remember, we are all the same and should have no labels of any kind. Remember to endorse me every time you endorse the author. WoW!!!! A new concept has arisen. According to Krishnamurti's statements, It is wrong for the moderators to ban anyone from using anyone else's content and putting their name on it. We can't label people as authors or posts, that would diminish mankind. I can now claim anything anyone has done ever as mine as we are all the same. I hope you see where this is heading. I am now laughing so hard it is becoming difficult to type.

 

3. I look as his statement and see the arrogance of the philosophers in that they get to define the universe. Why limit it to mankind. What if we meet aliens? They might not be nice. Mankind itself is a "label". The man contradicts his own statements as mankind would now be a label to identify humans. There are some that think that aliens will be some sort of beings that have transcended their petty concepts and are out to spread benevolence and peace across the galaxy. What if they are not? Warhammer 40K comes to mind. Why can't we just sit down and talk out our differences with those aliens. Why don't we just dispense with labels and call ourselves citizens of the universe. That will solve all of the problems in the warhammer 40K universe. There, problem solved. No more need for warhammer 40K mods as all is at peace because we have removed the labels that separated us. Yeah, Rigtht. I have some swampland......

 

4. The whole thrust of Krishnamurti's statements is to eliminate winners and losers. Those who have and those who don't. If I am a citizen of the world, I identify with the whole group. i will not deny others of my group resources as we are all of the same group. A naive and dangerous concept if everyone in the entire group does not share that exact sentiment. This goes against thousands of years of human experience and even our genetic makeup to survive. It is hard to assimilate all of the data surrounding you in your environment simultaneously. We group like things and experiences automatically into their own areas so we can process data more efficiently. we compartmentalize and group to survive. I used to do a very dangerous job. When I showed up to do that job, everything else, family, finances, friends, all other issues, were brushed aside and completely ignored. We called it "compartmentalizing". Depending on the level of danger, My entire concentration could be now focused on that job and surviving. Groups and Labels are not bad, they are tools to aid us. Just like everything else, they can be used for good or evil. We have to decide how we are going to use those labels, for good or for evil. This conversation is a lot more serous and sobering than many of you are taking it. Think about it.

 

Just my opinion. Cheers!!!! V/R MistTiger