Alisha Week #2 - The Psychology of Modern Self-Comparamentalization
The Lovers (Les Amants), René Magritte, 1928
Everywhere I look, people are finding random ways to categorize themselves. Whether it be the “dogs vs cats” or “pineapple on pizza” debates, we love the notion of grouping ourselves with others like us. This has stretched far beyond just pure fun, though. So many of my teachers have asked students for their “learning styles,” adapting their curriculums to the whims of a student; other people flaunt their chemistry with their partners, relationships bound by the rules of their respective “love languages.” But the ideas of love languages and learning styles were never real, and this has been known for years. So why maintain the facade?
As humans, I think we love deluding ourselves. We love the thrill of a chase for the unreachable, the rush of anxiety for a deadline procrastinated too long, the morbid fascination with a show’s hated finale we know is coming (I will never forgive How I Met Your Mother). A false promise of hope is better than learning to deal with the uncomfortable truth. We avoid what we don’t like to stay content in the now, actively worsening our futures all the while. We don’t want to have to struggle through reading a paper on endangered species when we could watch Rio instead, even if it might mean flunking out of APES a month later. We choose the simpler, less demanding path because we don’t want to face a challenge.
Despite this bias, these challenges are the critical point at which growth occurs. Sure, it might be quicker to just compliment your girlfriend and call it a day, but it’s the hours of movie nights and evening walks that give you the opportunity to become closer. We do experiments, regardless of the time they take, because they represent the applicability of conceptual lessons. We do the conceptual lessons because understanding the core of what is happening is needed to accurately apply the fundamentals. A diverse array of approaches is needed to form a comprehensive understanding of any subject, ignorant of supposed styles. Relegating yourself to one only shows a lack of passion to excel.
Now, all of this isn’t to say that we need to stop these methods. The same way that Buzzfeed quizzes let us reflect on often forgotten parts of ourselves, the self-categorization provides insight into our interactions with the world, and in settings like classrooms they can be useful to ensure constant engagement and understanding.
We should not be limited to one or the other type. It gives a false sense of community, a pretend common-point that truly is more harm than help. I trust that we can have the confidence in our identities to not need to lean back on restrictions, unveiling our true selves so that they may live and succeed as they wish.
Alisha - I see where you’re getting at when it comes to labeling. I feel like performatism, labeling, and marketing go hand in hand, and the three have plagued society for years because people are being commandeered by advertisements to fit into certain niches. I must say, though, that self-categorization has been an immutable part of society as consciousness developed during the cavemen era, when gender labels dictated one’s position in the division of labor system. Now, it has developed far past that, and labels have grown to address political, social, and economic situations. Sometimes these labels are indeed limiting. They don’t allow for nuance because labels come with a predetermined meaning, unmalleable to the individual adapting it. They could always take up more labels, but that just leads to more confusion. I also believe that humans shouldn’t try and label themselves everywhere, but then a question arises. To what extent is self-labeling acceptable? To what extent is self-labeling limiting?
ReplyDeleteHello Alisha! Your example about learning styles reminded me about how students complain about a teacher not teaching when they don’t put any effort to try learning different ways. A lot of my friends in AP Biology complain that they can only learn through videos, so they immediately resort to AI when they are assigned notetaking out of the slides. Instead of actually putting effort to try and understand the slides, they decide that the method is the problem. This connects to your point about how people choose shortcuts to avoid trying something new.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how much our environment influences the excuses that we make for ourselves. I personally know people that refuse to take shortcuts even when everyone around them is doing so. Some students will spend hours trying to understand an assignment that has no weight in the gradebook because they actually care about learning. So, why do some people choose to challenge themselves while others avoid it? If you expanded on how people’s experiences affect their choices, it would make your blog more interesting. I really enjoyed your blog and going forward I will try my best to not delude myself too.
Hi Alisha! I really liked your perspective on how people naturally want to categorize themselves. The comparison between something harmless such as “dogs vs. cats” and concepts like learning styles and love languages were especially interesting because it shows how easily these categories can become part of how we understand ourselves. I also found your point of choosing the easier path as relatable as it is definitely tempting to avoid something difficult when there is a simpler alternative to it. Even if we know the harder will benefit us more in the long run, we tend to opt for the simpler option. I also liked that you did not argue that these categories are not completely useless. Your posts make a strong point about how labels can be useful tools, but they should not become restrictions on who we are or what we are capable of.
ReplyDelete