 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In todays world,there are multiple identities attached to a person.Some trouble us.Some make us feel proud.Some we don't want to associate with.Some we feel as irrelevant.Some for which we argue/fight/kill.Some puts us at an advantage.Some at a disadvantage.
Some common identities:
1.Country
2.State
3.Caste
4.Religion
5.Sex (Male/ Female)
6.Age bracket (20's 30s 40s 50s etc)
7.Profession ( IT employee, lawyer, farmer etc)
8.Alumnus of education institute
9.Income Group ( poor, lower/middle/upper middle class, rich etc)
10.Poilitical affiliation (left, right etc)
11.Race ( Asian etc)
12.Language you speak
13.Fan of a particular sportstar, cinestar, celebrity etc
There is a time in history when most of the above identities did not exist.
What is your take on the concept of identity in todays's world , especially India? Any incident, where a particular identity of your's effected you?
Bol India Bol.......
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IMHO, the only identity that makes sense is "human beings". Almost every other identity you have listed seems to have created more problems than solutions. This is because people with these other identities tend to become dogmatic in their beliefs!
Many of the identities you've listed are also patently unfair because there isn't a "level playing ground". For example, you can't choose your gender, race, country/state of birth, caste, race, etc. I feel that it is silly to have a sense of pride about having identities that you've done nothing to deserve.
However, there are certain identities that do help recognize the work people have done. For example, the group of Nobel Prize winners or Olympic gold medalists, etc. Maybe even alumni of educational institutes that accept folks strictly thru' merit! One could argue that these identities can help inspire people to work harder or achieve something!
Lastly, there are identities you can opt to be a part of - like political affiliations or being a part of the fan base of a film star. I think these identities are also not helpful because one usually tends to assume that his or her own political party or film idol is the best! In other words, there is no constant critical evaluation of whether one's party or idol is really the best for the greatest good and/or the greatest number of people. Hence, I am mostly not in favour of these type of opt-in identities as well.
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
BALASUBRAMANIAN R
|
12 months ago |
|
|
|
| The identities listed by you are conveniently exploited by the powers that be for their own narrow parochial ends. You go and take an independent aurvey, the results will be just the opposte than what is being projected. That is why we get demands for creation of smaller states based on some of these identities listed, when the need of the hour is consolidation, we are craving for division. None of the identities will serve any useful purpose other than, as I've pointed out, dividing people. But that's the state of affairs today.
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Rithesh had nicely summed up a good response to your main question. And I would just repeat one sentence that he wrote and I have always believed in is that the only identity that makes sense and that matters is that we are "human beings"... period.
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| i like rithesh's response. in essense it is 'you are what you do'. which seems far more true to self. i'd like to add that 'how you do it' is equally important. coz not everyone can be a nuclear scientist or nobel prize winner, but the attitude with which you do your job defines you.
|
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
siddhartha S
|
11 months ago |
|
|
|
@Rithesh,abhi,vinnie
Ditto!
|
|
|
| | |
| Are you sure this question is inappropriate and needs to be flagged? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
