Name As Object Of Self-Identical - Essay Example

Name As Object Of Self-Identical Introduction: Other than people's faces and their physiology, names are human's other unique identifiers. Names, which are people's primary identifiers, often, dictate how people judge each other. People, obliviously, pass judgment about others based on their names. These assumptions form the rapport that people use in their interactions, and this highlights the importance of names. People judge one another based on their first impressions. Clothing, behavior, and general outlook are among the features people use to judge each other. People judge others self-identity based on the aforementioned features. In addition, names are responsible for how we first perceive ourselves. Parents after naming their children interact with them using these names. Names describe a person’s present self and more often than not they help people in forming their own first impressions. Names, whether given by parents or individually chosen are key in developing one’s self identity. People try to live up or run away from their names. The concept of self-identity, in recent years, has been the subject of many psychological, social and anthropology discussions (Perry, 2002, p4). This essay will analyze the influence a name or names have on the self-identity of a person, culture, organization or country. In anthropology, the term self-identity is usually in the context of ethnic identity. That is the perception of one-self, or self-sameness, in regard with others. Their joint characteristics of language and culture of the group form the group’s identity. Thesis Names and identities are peas in a pod. They are similar in nature as people confuse the two quite a lot. Names can refer to identities but they do not dictate an object’s or person’s self-identity. Body Names, unlike other identifying markers, are not subject to stereotyping. People rarely associate a name to a behavior or reputation; however, the name provides a platform from which a person judges his fellow human. A name, let us say “John”, quickly resonates with people. From this name, people are able to quickly know your background, compare you to other “Johns” they know, among other relevant information they have on the name “John”. These observations summarize the powerful effects a name has on others. After birth, parents spend plenty of time researching and considering the name they will give to their child (Perry, 2002, p5). Several factors are considered when choosing a child’s name as it prepares the child for the future. Parents will give strong names for their boys and feminine names for the boys. Majority of parents will choose names that are not prone to teasing or mocking by other children or people when they grow up. A child’s name leaves an indelible mark on the self-identity of a child for the rest of their lives. From a study of birth certificates, researchers found a pattern in the naming process. The researchers observed that boys who had feminine-like names misbehaved more than boys with masculine names. This difference became apparent when the children were in middle school. Self-esteem, a component of self-identity, contributes significantly to how people perceive their names and ultimately themselves. People who dislike their names are more likely to experience feelings of discontent or low self worth; they are not socially well-adjusted. Every child, according to the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child, has the inherent right to be named (M. Maclean, 1994, p3). A name is a right because of the implications it has on the social development of a child. Naming is responsible for converting “anybody” into “somebody”. The law requires a parent to name a child, and the appropriateness of the name is not their concern. The appropriateness of the name is the parents’ responsibility. In many cultures, the name of a child refers to a characteristic feature of the child and the parents’ relation to the child (M. Maclean, 1994, p.5). In Brazilian traditions, a baby is baptized shortly after its birth regardless of its health (D.Maybury-Lewis, 1984, p6). Brazilian mothers regard baptism as the official naming process of a child. The state recognizes a child's official name. However, according to their traditions, this is not the real name of the child. The child acquires its real name after living long enough to acquire a nickname from its peers (D.Maybury-Lewis, 1984, p7). This nickname becomes the real name of the child. The child shows glimpses of their future identity after living for a while. These glimpses enable the society to give a child a proper name. The parents and society are able to forecast the future of the child, and they use this in awarding the child an appropriate name. A name is powerful as it can dictate the relations a child has with other members of society and its position in the social matrix (M. Maclean, 1994, p7). The name, in the cultural sense, can identify the gender, geographic origin, religion and kinship of an individual. Furthermore, a name delineates the social interactions of the individual, and it crosses the boundaries in the same interaction. From an anthropological perspective, identity is culturally defined and not awarded in the naming process (Bodenhorn, 2006, p.2). This definition of identity, on a cultural basis, makes it a complex concept. Identity, in anthropological terms, refers to several aspects of a human being. First, it refers to a person’s society, where he belongs. Secondly, identity refers to the self-image a person has of himself (Bodenhorn, 2006, p3). Finally, self-identity refers to the common image society has of the person. The integration of these three aspects of self-identity forms a person’s self-identity. A name is the identifying factor of a child, as he becomes an adult. However, the name does not contribute to the self-identity of the child (Bodenhorn, 2006, p5). Children do not have identities; their names serve the purpose of identification from their peers. As they grow to become adolescents, they strive to attain their individual identities. A person gains their identity during their adulthood. When a person undergoes an identity crisis that is when his or her identity is forming (Perry, 2002, p14). Traditional identity relatively remains constant over several generations. Nonetheless, social identity changes over time. For example, today’s society is defined by technology and virtual reality compared to the previous generations where technology was not as pronounced. Different generation’s social identity changes according to the circumstances present in their time (Bodenhorn, 2006, p7). To accurately identify a person, his or her name is not sufficient. This is because the name does not tell people anything on the identity of a person (Bodenhorn, 2006, p9). The only time a name resembles the object or person it names is when there is knowledge of the person or object. Names are merely masks worn by people in the social arena and should be used to judge the identity of the people. Names simply help people in distinguishing each other, but not in defining a person. Names are insufficient in giving people their self-identities. This is because people are devoid of identities at birth (Bodenhorn, 2006, p5). The identity they have early on in their lives is solely the “identity-image” of their parents. The parents’ task is to rear a child into what they desire and they, therefore, create a child’s early self-identity. This self-identity does not take into consideration the child’s individual dispositions (Perry, 2002, p12). To acquire their identities, adolescents have to overcome various obstacles such as their parents’ authorities and the culturally established behaviors. This task in traditional societies is difficult to achieve. The popular phrase “Many individuals die before they have been born” illustrates the limited nature of names in defining peoples’ identities (Bodenhorn, 2006, p9). Majority of people in society live their lives with the identities ascribed to them; never knowing their true selves. The identities they project to society are often their parents’, friend’s, authorities’ just to mention a few. The names “Nixon” and “Venus” remain as they are; one cannot derive contextual information regarding the people with these names (Derrida, 1976, p109). The proper names, as in the Brazilian culture, become the rigid designators that are used in distinguishing and identifying the people named Nixon and Venus. They are points of reference used in social interactions, but they persons with those names do not become synonymous with their names. Identity crises, famous for their destabilizing nature, of individuals, societies and cultures manifest later in their development cycle. The crises often results from changes in the economic, social and civilization status of the society or individual. The individuals often experience confusion in their social interaction. Individuals during an identity crisis are uncertain of themselves and their relation to the factor leading to the crisis. Societies living in a democratic political society are more likely to face this crisis better than their counterparts are in an authoritarian system. If names have little influence on the identity of a person, how are identities of individuals formed? The formation of identities is a rather dynamic process that involves more than the name of a person (Derrida, 1976, p110). The name is only a rigid designator of a person in a conversation, and an individual can change it at will. The first step in the formation of identity is the adoption of social identity. Everyone is born into a society, and they are bound to identify their place in that society. Humans are social beings, and this gives them the need to belong somewhere (J. Derrida, 1976, p110). In a society, an individual can understand the concept of “we”. Upon adoption of a group's social identity, one has to live according to the norms and beliefs of the group. By belonging to a society, a child can fight off loneliness and threat present in the world that they are ill-equipped in handling. Social identity despite its importance is not the ideal identity for an individual (Bodenhorn, 2006, p9). In order to gain a personal identity, a person should freely determine his or her own identity. A person’s name should not be a source of their identity. The name is part of their identity and not their identity. A name as abovementioned is the designator or referent used by people during social interactions (J. Derrida, 1976, p114). One should disassociate with their social identities and should start looking at themselves through their own eyes. Identity is as the result of a process known as individuation when an individual can practice his free will. Individuation helps in the differentiation of people from each other. A signature, another unique identifier of individuals, derives its uniqueness from a person’s name. The signature, when signed over a text, grants the text some form of identity (Derrida, 1976, p112). However, the text derives its real identity from the actual meaning of the text. The text bears the responsibility of the signature. In an object or person’s perspective, the person bears the responsibility for his name. Others might argue that if the person awards himself a name it would be because of his or her narcissistic tendencies. The proper name should be a vehicle of self-generation, where a person’s identity confides (J. Derrida, 1976, p114). This definition displays the fickle nature of names in describing their bearers as the individual can break away from his or her received name. This detachment of people from their names is common in many cultures and religions. Catholics, for example, in the ceremony of Confirmation adopt a new christening name different from their Baptismal name (Perry, 2002, p8). A change of character over time may warrant one to change his name willingly. The practice of slavery in the United States provides a case study on the effects of naming. The freed slaves maintained their surnames to act as a reminder of the painful past, after the abolition of this practice. This naming ritual supports the claim that names do not shape identities. Another example is the naming of spirits in the island country of Madagascar. Spirits are beings with no essence or body have names in the Malagasy culture (M.Lambek, n.d, p2). When Madagascar native dies, he becomes an ancestral spirit, and their names are different from their previous names. Their names are changed to reflect the change in being (M.Lambek, n.d, p3). The new name refers and marks the spirit’s new identity and their existence. In short, the name supports the identity of the spirit. The names are mere referents to the spirits existence and identity but do not form their identity. Names are neither the bridge between the living and the dead nor the identity of individuals (M.Lambek, n.d, p4). The names never belong to any individual. Names are rarely unique, and several people may have the same name at any one given time. Conclusion In conclusion, a person’s identity is the only authentic characteristic he can have besides their DNA. Names, despite their significance, do not help in the discovering of a person's identity. A person’s gifts, strengths, challenges, goals and dreams form their identity. The assumption that names are people’s identities is naïve to say the least. An objects properties, features and environment form its identity (Bodenhorn, 2006, p10). Names are merely part of a person’s identity, which develops throughout their lives. The naming process is a ritual practiced all over the world as every individual is granted a name after birth. In addition, modern culture influences the naming process through its stars, main characters, films among others. The person being awarded the name usually has little control over the name given. This lack of control over the choice of his or her name compromises the effect a name has over an individual. Identity, in contrast to the name, is the individual’s choice and therefore, not defined by his or her name. Bibliography Bodenhorn, 2006, The anthropology of names and naming. Cambridge University Press Derrida, J. 1976, Of grammatology. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins university Press (Chap.1, pp.107- 118) Lambek, M. What’s in a name? Name bestowal and the identity of spirits in Mayotte and Northwest Madagascar. Maclean, M. 1994, The name of the mother: Writing illegitimacy. London: Routledge Maybury-Lewis,D,1984,Dialectical societies:The Gˆe and Bororo of Central Brazil Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Perry, John, 2002, Identity, Personal Identity and the Self, Hackett Publishing. Read More