Articles, Week 4 paper:
Identity
Who am I? My name is Austin Haley, my social security number is 6**-6*-8***, I was born in the Haley family on July 5th, 1984, in Oakland California, in my parents house on Belgrave St. I have red hair; I’m approximately 6’1” tall, 200lbs., male, white. I’m a citizen of the United States of America, a west-coast American, a Californian, and a northern Californian. With a few small exceptions, I’m pretty sure you could find a thousand other people just like me.
Considering how Most of these factors would be considered accurate for determining my uniqueness or how I am easily or accurately identified. But what about the things that I believe make me up that are more important than skin, hair, or eye color? As it was put in Perspectives on Personal Identity, “what is considered part of an identity is variable and even possibly arbitrary, or at least dependent on context and purpose, and the distinction – or, indeed, the blurring of the line – between governmental ascription and the individual self-conception may point up one of the sources of tension to which identity management and identification processes give rise (Personal Identity, p16-17).” It seems somewhat ironic that the long held forms of personal identification (i.e.: hair color, race, gender, etc.) are very often the least effective at truly distinguishing between different people. Certain aspects of physical identity are less easily duplicated, or not at all, not everyone who fits your description may have the same blood type, and surely they wouldn’t have the same fingerprints or genetic code, but what do these things matter when it comes to how an individual views herself?
It’s obvious that I cannot be identified, at least not within society for the grand scale purpose of cataloging people, as a lover of books. I read a lot, and books and the written word are very important in my life, but by no means could you readily identify me as a book lover, and not first state that I’m a white male with red hair. Some classifications are just too easy. Stereotyping people, though rather single-minded and often insulting, seems to work pretty well when dealing with large numbers of people. Not every person who is white or black sees themselves as primarily that, but some do, and at first glance, skin color can be somewhat obvious. Fingerprints and social security numbers are well and good, but what about an environment where people are able to dictate who they are, or more often who they want to be, without any sort of authentication?
The internet allows anyone to become whomever they choose, even if that is a thirty year old pedophile choosing to represent himself as a thirteen year old girl in a chat room with rather ill intentions. The same freedom would also allow some fifteen year old computer genius the chance to hobnob with uber geeks from all over the world, under a subtle guise and perhaps an erroneous age of 21 or so. How about a person who is wheel chair bound? Their identity is very much forced into one that is socially stigmatizing, their disability something that is impossible to visually ignore, but online that same person is free to express their mind without any sort of hindrance due to their condition.