The Problem With Identity

Who are you? What groups do you affiliate with? Where are you from? These are just some of the questions one can ask regarding identity.

But what is identity? There are numerous philosophers who talk about this very question.

There is a debate over absolute versus relative identity, but the debate seems to lean in favor of relative identity.

Relative identity posits identity does not only pertain to oneself but in relation to the outside world or other people. Obviously, it is more metaphysical than that but this idea of relative identity relates to social psychologies concept of social identity.

Social identity is the portion of an individual’s sense of self-derived from perceived membership in a relevant social group. This was proposed by social psychologist John Turner and colleagues.

Unlike relative identity which is more philosophical, social identity pertains to the fact we identify with groups and these groups impact our behaviors.

We all identify with our sports teams, our countries, families, and more. How and what we identify with will impact our sense of self or identity.

Identity is not this static sense of who we are in the world, rather, it is this dynamic interplay with the external world (our interaction with others) and our internal world (our thoughts and emotions).

However, due to this interplay between external and internal worlds, our identity is in constant flux. If there is no stable you or me, who are we?

If we do not know who we are, how can we be anything? This is the problem with identity. Maybe we should explore this fundamental concept more.