Classification is as classification does

“We are (to a large extent) as we see ourselves reacted to by others.” A psychologist by the name of Charles Cooley developed the concept of what he called “the looking glass self” and coined the above phrase to, which I have paraphrased, encapsulate his philosophy on the formation of self image. At first glance the most obvious implications are that our image is greatly influenced by the way we feel we are received by our peers. But I feel it also reveals something inherent in the human condition that is useful for our discussion. That is the need to belong to a group. Be you punk or goth, republican or democrat, Lambda-Lambda-Lambda or Omega-Mu, or even Homo Erectus or Ursas Horribles, the need to be a part of a group is so strong it borders on compulsion.

But does all this hyper classification really help the individual understand the world around them? Firstly to accept any label is also to accept the labeler’s power over you. For just as any contribution serves to define it’s group so do the rules of the group define its members. To accept a label as truth is also to accept a power relationship proposed by the inventor of the label. This brings with it an implication of Hegemony, for if I agree to recognize everything by a set of rules and definitions that you hand me, do you not have power over me? And by and large that has consistently been the easier path, to complacently agree to the system we were born into as the effective truth and do what we can to pass it on. Now what happens when the circumstances that gave birth to that system of classification are no longer in place to ensure the systems validity?

I personally see no difference between everyday social labels, scientific classification, and genre. These are all systems of ordering informational experiences that are presumed to still be valid and are rarely if ever challenged. Furthermore and perhaps most importantly they succeed only in providing limits. Armed with these preconceived notions we are only free to explore within boundaries. And by accepting these boundaries we are only accepting erroneous power relationships that fetter progress and only satisfy our compulsion for the illusion of control over our environment and freedom to be efficacious in response to it.