Who here doesn’t have identity?

[Ursus Chainus]

Think identity is a loose concept, unless you are very black and white thinking. Like l am Catholic male, who is Democrat who belongs to the workforce as a productive citizen. Where a looser concept maybe, l kinda of float around becoming what l need to be at the time l am in that place. A shift changer, somebody who fits into wherever for safety, or financial reasons, or to support their partner. Neither way is incorrect, it just is.

I think my definition of identity is not conceptual and is well defined. My issue with the words that people use to express their experience is that they are not well defined. It actually makes it difficult to discuss important things that effect us.

I would agree that most things that relate to our experience as humans are conceptual and loosely defined.

 

[Aspychata]

Guess the problem arises that people are easily manipulated if they don't have identity, as a way to control the mmasses. So mass indoctrination is accomplished by using the identity or lack of identity.

 

[Ursus Chainus]

Guess the problem arises that people are easily manipulated if they don't have identity, as a way to control the mmasses. So mass indoctrination is accomplished by using the identity or lack of identity.

I feel it is the opposite. Identity is a the way to manipulate people. Identity causes most of the problems in the human race. Politicians use identity to cause fear of others.

Racism, war, oppression are all caused by people identifying as a group. Cults are about identity.

A lack of identity means that I am simply a person. If we related as people first and made relationships and experiences primary rather than identity, the world would be a much more compassionate place.

I certainly have deep scars from not having identity but having it pushed on me.

Not having identity certainly doesn’t make me a better person. I have so many scars that I can be reactive and hurtful to those that I love.

In general, I do tend to relate to others based on them being people first… not their identity.

 

[Au Naturel]

I don’t have identity.

What this means is that I cannot define myself within any cultural norms. My ego is almost non-functional.

Identity is the part of ego that connects us to tribe and group. It is a self categorization.

You know you don’t have identity when it is hard for you to say: “I am (insert something here)”. We all have to say “I am X”. If you don’t have identity, this is what I call “nominal identity”.

If you don’t have identity…. Do you have a “comorbidity” of autism and ADD? (Not a big fan of disorderology)

Identity as you describe it is one of those negative instinctive traits that humans possess. It served a purpose in the stone age but it may yet destroy the species. Tribalism almost inevitably leads to discrimination, hate, and war. "With my brother against my cousin and with my cousin against the stranger."

I am a human. I have certain traits, preferences, and interests, but they don't define me. People can have different traits, preferences, and interests, and that is fine by me. You're still one of us humans. I don't judge anyone by their politics or interests or skin color or sexuality or relative wealth. To do so is a great insult in that it takes away a person's agency and makes them a stereotype.

 

[lovely_darlingprettybaby]

I don’t have identity.

What this means is that I cannot define myself within any cultural norms. My ego is almost non-functional.

Identity is the part of ego that connects us to tribe and group. It is a self categorization.

You know you don’t have identity when it is hard for you to say: “I am (insert something here)”. We all have to say “I am X”. If you don’t have identity, this is what I call “nominal identity”.

If you don’t have identity…. Do you have a “comorbidity” of autism and ADD? (Not a big fan of disorderology)

I have an identity but I feel like my identity is constantly evolving and changing.
I feel like I am stuck between a girl and woman
I do not have an ego either also I believe you can better yourself in all areas once you find something you are unhappy with and it does not mean you are 'perfect'. It just means humans can constantly better themselves in some areas and change.
I do not believe identity means you can not be different things are different times but it also doesn't mean you are not certain about certain truths in your life.

 

[lovely_darlingprettybaby]

Identity is a tricky topic. It is assumed by psychologists that we all have it.

It is not something someone else can define for you.

Yes I think maybe it is different for different people who knows. .
I think you can also change over time like evolve

 

[lovely_darlingprettybaby]

Being part of a family isn’t identity like gender might be. Religion is identity. Nationality is identity.

Identity is on a continuum. The most extreme identifications are racist, homophobic, transphobic, classist, sexist… etc.

A part of identity is actually identifying strongly (or weakly) with a group you are a member of or how you categorize yourself.

I do not believe religion or nationality is necessarily an identity
Like faith can be a lifestyle in the sense that it can be a lifestyle or a relationship
For me I want to identify with a God that tells me that I can live a life I chose without any norms and I am always enough in His eyes so I can run to Him anytime my heart bleeds or I am sad and I can share my joy with Him and thank Him for the good.
And also He is always a constant like any other relationship and the one you love the best always.
I have had such issues with faith like this...whereas I feel pressure to be a, b and c.
And I mean I want to live my truths and I know I am not perfect just because I do not relate to someone else's truth does not mean they have to compare theirs to mine
I think for me, identity is a persona for some people whereas it depends on the person but like say if you are black some might see it as a identity some may not.
Like is your identity the colour of your skin or is part of it your customs, traditions. Some people may not see their customs and traditions as part of their identity because they can change over time so it may just be their personality. I think people's identity does shift through time maybe for all people as they mature and learn things and may change preferences for some people. So there may be a reason for all stages of life.

 

[kenaij]

I don`t think I understand the english termanology to add anything useful. So I just bump here to follow along and learn.

 

[Misty Avich]

Hmm, well I guess logically my identity is white, British, atheist female.

 

[Dagan]

I'll be serious this time. Identity is simple, but it is definitely broken into two parts due to, well, people just like doing this kind of thing too often. I blame the Webster's dictionary folks for not just having another word entirely, rather than allowing any one word however many definitions. Anyway...

There is "literal identity" --- It's how you are dead set identified. Can it be wrong? Yes. People assume wrong things constantly that aren't correct. Can it be absolutely correct, though? Yes. When the factual information and specs about an individual are listed / labeled, then yes, you can be correctly identified. Every single little, factual aspect of an individual person, place or thing becomes part of their identity - it's a compilation of facts. You have one. Your parents have theirs. A house has one. A dog has one. A rocking chair has one. Etc.

Then there is also "figurative identity" --- This seems to be the one you are wanting to discuss here. This is the one that people will assume wrong way more often because it's more about perceptions, social cues, social groupings, beliefs in politics / religion / etc. This is the one that would concern ideals in relation to cults or just cult mindsets. This is the one that would anger you if being profiled or flat out treated a certain way based on just how you look or have acted in front of someone else. This is the one that concerns anything to do with ego. This is the area where people want labels, want to be called however such....or very much don't want to be labeled or called however.

 

[AprilR]

I have my own identity but i dont share it with people and create fake ones for them. Probably due to masking

 

[The Pandector]

Instructive thread. My knee jerk response is that no, I have no identity in that regard. I never felt like a member of my birth family; quite the opposite, consciously felt apart.

Like your typical Industrial Age fool, I thought of my work as an identifying factor, but certainly never felt like a part of any group. Which pretty much sums it up for me: I place myself in specific categories, but never felt like a part of any group created by rational categorization.

I’d love to be able to explain how the church is the shining exception to this otherwise unbroken rule in my life… but it never was. Even though I’ve played prominent roles in the church, I have always had the distinct experience of being disconnected from it. While this is true, one of my favorite topics to teach was the connectedness of every believing Christian, a metaphysical fact regardless of belief or feeling.

Undiagnosed, I believed the Lord had created me apart so that I could look at the world and the church through dispassionate eyes and teach the Bible from a purely objective perspective. Diagnosed and looking back, I still believe that.

So, you could say that I identify as a Sunday school teacher, or as a church elder. However, nowhere in that time did I feel or have the experience of being a part of any group. And don’t get me started about identifying as a Sunday school teacher.

 

[Tyer]

This reminds me of a video I watched.

The benefits of "not belonging".

Being not in groups can give you the oppurtunity to see things neutral with enough distance. Overviewing situations or opinions (or choices) with distance.
You can even be a connecten between different groups and act as a mediator.
Because you arnt too involved in one side or opinion to overlook facts.

(I also define myself as "I am who I am"
How my body looks and where it comes from doesnt really matter that much. So...identify yourself <or not> how you want. It cant be wrong.)

 

[Aspychata]

Maybe we walk around with constants, a set identity, and a subset of a shifting identity that evolves with us. As for as the Nordic culture, being from a very cold place, where working as a team benefited everyone to survive. Now it seems society has shifted, and we all work against each other and even ourselves.

 

[Ursus Chainus]

Identity as you describe it is one of those negative instinctive traits that humans possess. It served a purpose in the stone age but it may yet destroy the species. Tribalism almost inevitably leads to discrimination, hate, and war. "With my brother against my cousin and with my cousin against the stranger."

I am a human. I have certain traits, preferences, and interests, but they don't define me. People can have different traits, preferences, and interests, and that is fine by me. You're still one of us humans. I don't judge anyone by their politics or interests or skin color or sexuality or relative wealth. To do so is a great insult in that it takes away a person's agency and makes them a stereotype.

It is not considered negative in psychology. There are different levels of identity. Some are weak and some are strong.

What makes a tribe stick together? It is identity. It is a core part of the human survival method… so are people who don’t have identity or have non-tribal identity. I won’t get into that.

Identity has “machinery” in the human brain. It is instinctual in humans. It simply doesn’t exist in all humans.

Negative is a concept that makes little sense to me. It is my view that humans have not evolved to the point that they can live in cultures with more than 100 people at the most.

Not negative but what was functional is now dysfunctional…

 

[Tom]

This is a strange thought to me. Not that you are 'strange'. We all are strange therefore strange is not really strange.
It is that I haven't experienced this particular feeling within autism. I find identifying rather easy. And coupled with an active imagination I can identify with almost anything. Though getting the group you wish to identify with to buy it is another matter. I can even identify with non-human groups. Dogs are fairly accepting but unless you raise something else from birth they aren't very amenable to it.

I find the lack of ego even more surprising. Do you mean you don't have a self interest, a desire for status or recognition? Though I can imagine it I don't feel it. To appear so would have to be a great act of will (or act) on my part. But I do find something admirable about it.

 

[Dagan]

Tribes also very much explain both definitions of identity, too, though..? Figuratively, yes, they will have the same mindsets, ideals and such that make them a tribe, but that's not the only explanation. Literal identities of each individual in a tribe (whenever I have really studied any tribe) will reveal that they each know and accept their strengths and weaknesses and how they best help everyone overall, together, being a solid unit to maintain their way of life.

 

[The Pandector]

Identity has “machinery” in the human brain. It is instinctual in humans. It simply doesn’t exist in all humans.

This has been my conclusion. NT's are largely unaware of the operation of this instinctual thought and behavior, thinking it is consciously formed. This is a main reason they simply cannot understand the immense effort it takes to consciously fabricate such behavior if it didn't come installed at birth. They, literally, are 'naturals', and an autist doesn't have a hope in the world of keeping up on the world's turf.

 

[Ursus Chainus]

The Identity Theory of Autism: How Autistic Identity Is Experienced Differently

Terra Vance posits that Autistic people experience empathy and emotions differently because the way autistic identity is structured differs from non-autistic people’s identity constructs.

neuroclastic.com

This is close to what I am talking about. My main view of identity is that it is a functional part of the human survival strategy and must be defined as such.

 

[Au Naturel]

It is not considered negative in psychology. There are different levels of identity. Some are weak and some are strong.

What makes a tribe stick together? It is identity. It is a core part of the human survival method… so are people who don’t have identity or have non-tribal identity. I won’t get into that.

Identity has “machinery” in the human brain. It is instinctual in humans. It simply doesn’t exist in all humans.

Negative is a concept that makes little sense to me. It is my view that humans have not evolved to the point that they can live in cultures with more than 100 people at the most.

Not negative but what was functional is now dysfunctional…

If functional is the ability to produce desired results, dysfunctional can only be negative.

We're not isolated bands of hunter-gatherers hiding from predators and competing with other species and tribes for limited resources, with disease and famine always right around the corner. A lot of the "human survival method" is profoundly harmful and dangerous in a world with 8 billion people and high levels of technical sophistication in war-making. Identity is instinctively a zero-sum game. Killing people because they don't share your identity seems to be the rule and not the exception. Sadly, something we seem to share with chimps.

Freud pointed this out as the pathology of small differences where two groups who share 99% of values and culture will focus on the 1% of the difference to maintain their separate group identity.