badpuppy Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 One of the struggles I've always had is the trouble with labels. There are certain labels we do not choose for ourselves like: Male, Female, Tall, Short, Black, White, etc. There are associations and assumptions with each of those labels but they aren't a label we've put on ourselves. Religion/philosophy is different. It's a label we pick, despite whatever problematic issues may be associated with that label. Inevitably, whatever label we pick, there is SOMETHING where we don't really "fit". So we spend a lot of time either trying to make our pieces fit in with the received wisdom, or we spend a lot of time feeling somehow 'wrong' for not fitting. Likewise every path... every label... has evil done in it's name. It's one thing to be "female". People can look at me and plainly see I'm female. They may have preconceived notions about females or feel females are all "fill in the blank". but I didn't choose that label. It's a label the consensus reality uses for those who have the sexual organs I have. I'm finding that I like labels less and less. Especially when they are labels I put on myself. If someone wants to know what I believe or think, they can ask me. If they don't feel like having a long conversation, then they don't need to know. It's not their business. When I don't have a label, I don't have to come from a place of defensiveness because people who get to know me will get to know me on my terms as who I actually am, rather than a box they can put me in. I easily let go of the Christian label because it never fit me at all. The only thing that kept me inside it was hell. I tried the agnostic label but too many people don't know what the hell that means. It simply means you dont' KNOW. None of us KNOW. Part of the nature of being human is having a big long list of shit you don't know. But too many people think agnostic means you haven't made up your mind or you're on the fence. Also, it's not really super informative. It's only an admission that you aren't arrogant. It still gives no real knowledge about how you see the universe with which you've been presented. On some level "atheist" fits for me, but on other levels it doesn't. i.e. I believe in no personal deities or spiritual beings that can interact with me like ghosts and such. I would gladly be embraced by the atheists until I brought up the: "Oh, but I do believe personal consciousness survives death and that matter comes from consciousness not the other way around." Even though technically atheism is lack of belief in gods, most atheists seem to lack belief in anything but the material. I tried "pagan". Pagan was actually a very lovely label in a lot of ways for me. I liked Pagan because it was a pretty open/free thing that gave me lots of room to explore and didn't really have one set of beliefs everyone accepted because it was so varied. But there was a lot of supernatural stuff I didn't want to deal with in many pagan paths. (Of course that's not how all pagans see it, but I digress.) I couldn't find a "practical paganism" like I've found a practical Buddhism. My latest label, one I've had for a few years now, has been "Buddhist". This one really fits me well in a lot of ways, but there are certain things that seem to be the goal in Buddhism that I just don't accept. Though most of my beliefs have a Buddhist correlation, and I'm nothing if not at least "Buddhist-y". Much of the language I use to express my views is often very Buddhist in nature. But I can't escape the feeling that by accepting this label I'm being shoe-horned into a box and that I'm going to start trying to shove myself into it. I think my spiritual path and views should "unfold", not be forced. And by "not be forced" I don't mean that that force is coming from outside me. It's coming from inside. Because when you accept a label, the label becomes identity. And identity is important to people. It causes them to try to become more whatever the thing they think they are. And while I gain a lot of helpful things from Buddhism and I find great comfort in the fact that there are others out there who see the world much as I do, there are those divergent places that make me feel like I'm limiting myself too much by someone else's conception of reality. I am not a follower, and every time I try to be one, I bump up against the wall where I realize that I'm just not wired that way. Buddhism was founded by a man we call "The Buddha" (Not his name, but I don't want to Google for proper spelling.) The Buddha got to believe exactly what HE believed. He got to practice exactly as HE felt he should practice. He diverged from one system of belief to form his own. There is a lot of value and wisdom in that path, but it's still how one human being conceptualized things and the interpretations of all the human beings who came after him of his ideas. If we were to go by percentage, I could say I'm probably 70% Buddhist. That's pretty epic for me. But I am not the person who follows the path. I'm the person who creates my own. I don't want to close doors or limit what I can use in my path. I don't want to take something and go: "Gee, I like that, that makes a lot of sense to me and really works for me but it's not Buddhist enough so it's not going to have as high a place of value for me." I also don't want to change my religious label every few years as I change, which inevitably I will. Spiritually I tend to be very nomadic. Though there are certain things I accept or don't accept based on logic/mental health, that leaves a lot of variety, still. So, I think I'm going to drop the label Buddhist. Not because it isn't largely accurate--I do feel that it is--but because I feel like the next road I'd go down is a road where I would start trying to force myself into boxes I don't fit into in service of following somebody else's revealed truth. So... I think I'm going to change my label to: "Free Agent" because it's the least limiting shorthand I can think of. If someone asks me what I believe I can choose to tell them it's personal, say I'm a free agent, or ask them how much time they've got. Probably "free agent" will invite questions, but that's good, because I'd rather people know what I really think about an issue than make a set of assumptions which may or may not be true based upon a label I give them. Others mileage may vary. This is just where I'm at, and something I've been struggling with for a few months now. With regards to my family, I will let them have the "Buddhist" label for me. It seems simpler that way. Describing myself as a "free agent" or "one without a label" would only make me look more convertable. Something I am not interested in. (And if I'm really honest, a big part of my need to "take an established label" has revolved around this issue.) I also think in a way a label like that was like Dumbo's magic feather. It let me feel real. Not a real "whatever the label was" but real, period. As if, the label was required to prove that I have thoughts and ideas about things. It felt like floating in space with nothing to hold onto otherwise. But I'd rather float without a ground to stand on, than be chained to the ground. And labels are starting to feel like chains to me. So that's where I am. Definitely I want to continue to learn about Buddhism. My beliefs and practices aren't suddenly changing, I just don't want the limits and boxes. I'll take what works for me and leave the rest. The same way I'll interact with any other ideas/paths I explore. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noumena Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 One of the struggles I've always had is the trouble with labels. There are certain labels we do not choose for ourselves like: Male, Female, Tall, Short, Black, White, etc. There are associations and assumptions with each of those labels but they aren't a label we've put on ourselves. Religion/philosophy is different. It's a label we pick, despite whatever problematic issues may be associated with that label. Inevitably, whatever label we pick, there is SOMETHING where we don't really "fit". So we spend a lot of time either trying to make our pieces fit in with the received wisdom, or we spend a lot of time feeling somehow 'wrong' for not fitting. Likewise every path... every label... has evil done in it's name. It's one thing to be "female". People can look at me and plainly see I'm female. They may have preconceived notions about females or feel females are all "fill in the blank". but I didn't choose that label. It's a label the consensus reality uses for those who have the sexual organs I have. I'm finding that I like labels less and less. Especially when they are labels I put on myself. If someone wants to know what I believe or think, they can ask me. If they don't feel like having a long conversation, then they don't need to know. It's not their business. When I don't have a label, I don't have to come from a place of defensiveness because people who get to know me will get to know me on my terms as who I actually am, rather than a box they can put me in. I easily let go of the Christian label because it never fit me at all. The only thing that kept me inside it was hell. I tried the agnostic label but too many people don't know what the hell that means. It simply means you dont' KNOW. None of us KNOW. Part of the nature of being human is having a big long list of shit you don't know. But too many people think agnostic means you haven't made up your mind or you're on the fence. Also, it's not really super informative. It's only an admission that you aren't arrogant. It still gives no real knowledge about how you see the universe with which you've been presented. On some level "atheist" fits for me, but on other levels it doesn't. i.e. I believe in no personal deities or spiritual beings that can interact with me like ghosts and such. I would gladly be embraced by the atheists until I brought up the: "Oh, but I do believe personal consciousness survives death and that matter comes from consciousness not the other way around." Even though technically atheism is lack of belief in gods, most atheists seem to lack belief in anything but the material. I tried "pagan". Pagan was actually a very lovely label in a lot of ways for me. I liked Pagan because it was a pretty open/free thing that gave me lots of room to explore and didn't really have one set of beliefs everyone accepted because it was so varied. But there was a lot of supernatural stuff I didn't want to deal with in many pagan paths. (Of course that's not how all pagans see it, but I digress.) I couldn't find a "practical paganism" like I've found a practical Buddhism. My latest label, one I've had for a few years now, has been "Buddhist". This one really fits me well in a lot of ways, but there are certain things that seem to be the goal in Buddhism that I just don't accept. Though most of my beliefs have a Buddhist correlation, and I'm nothing if not at least "Buddhist-y". Much of the language I use to express my views is often very Buddhist in nature. But I can't escape the feeling that by accepting this label I'm being shoe-horned into a box and that I'm going to start trying to shove myself into it. I think my spiritual path and views should "unfold", not be forced. And by "not be forced" I don't mean that that force is coming from outside me. It's coming from inside. Because when you accept a label, the label becomes identity. And identity is important to people. It causes them to try to become more whatever the thing they think they are. And while I gain a lot of helpful things from Buddhism and I find great comfort in the fact that there are others out there who see the world much as I do, there are those divergent places that make me feel like I'm limiting myself too much by someone else's conception of reality. I am not a follower, and every time I try to be one, I bump up against the wall where I realize that I'm just not wired that way. Buddhism was founded by a man we call "The Buddha" (Not his name, but I don't want to Google for proper spelling.) The Buddha got to believe exactly what HE believed. He got to practice exactly as HE felt he should practice. He diverged from one system of belief to form his own. There is a lot of value and wisdom in that path, but it's still how one human being conceptualized things and the interpretations of all the human beings who came after him of his ideas. If we were to go by percentage, I could say I'm probably 70% Buddhist. That's pretty epic for me. But I am not the person who follows the path. I'm the person who creates my own. I don't want to close doors or limit what I can use in my path. I don't want to take something and go: "Gee, I like that, that makes a lot of sense to me and really works for me but it's not Buddhist enough so it's not going to have as high a place of value for me." I also don't want to change my religious label every few years as I change, which inevitably I will. Spiritually I tend to be very nomadic. Though there are certain things I accept or don't accept based on logic/mental health, that leaves a lot of variety, still. So, I think I'm going to drop the label Buddhist. Not because it isn't largely accurate--I do feel that it is--but because I feel like the next road I'd go down is a road where I would start trying to force myself into boxes I don't fit into in service of following somebody else's revealed truth. So... I think I'm going to change my label to: "Free Agent" because it's the least limiting shorthand I can think of. If someone asks me what I believe I can choose to tell them it's personal, say I'm a free agent, or ask them how much time they've got. Probably "free agent" will invite questions, but that's good, because I'd rather people know what I really think about an issue than make a set of assumptions which may or may not be true based upon a label I give them. Others mileage may vary. This is just where I'm at, and something I've been struggling with for a few months now. With regards to my family, I will let them have the "Buddhist" label for me. It seems simpler that way. Describing myself as a "free agent" or "one without a label" would only make me look more convertable. Something I am not interested in. (And if I'm really honest, a big part of my need to "take an established label" has revolved around this issue.) I also think in a way a label like that was like Dumbo's magic feather. It let me feel real. Not a real "whatever the label was" but real, period. As if, the label was required to prove that I have thoughts and ideas about things. It felt like floating in space with nothing to hold onto otherwise. But I'd rather float without a ground to stand on, than be chained to the ground. And labels are starting to feel like chains to me. So that's where I am. Definitely I want to continue to learn about Buddhism. My beliefs and practices aren't suddenly changing, I just don't want the limits and boxes. I'll take what works for me and leave the rest. The same way I'll interact with any other ideas/paths I explore. YES!!!! You Rock!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConureDelSol Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 I've been struggling with labels myself lately. I've gone from Christian to Liberal Christian to Baha'i to deist to atheist. Even moreso there are labels within atheism. I can't seem to be able to determine when I tell someone a constructive agnostic atheist, a secular humanist or just a plain old atheist. Labels seem to serve as confusion in many situations rather than some sort of guide as to what you should and shouldn't believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noggy Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 The only use of labels is for stereotyping. Why would anyone want that? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badpuppy Posted December 25, 2011 Author Share Posted December 25, 2011 I've been struggling with labels myself lately. I've gone from Christian to Liberal Christian to Baha'i to deist to atheist. Even moreso there are labels within atheism. I can't seem to be able to determine when I tell someone a constructive agnostic atheist, a secular humanist or just a plain old atheist. Labels seem to serve as confusion in many situations rather than some sort of guide as to what you should and shouldn't believe. It's interesting that you were Baha'i for a bit. I remember vaguely studying them in a world religions class (not a christian-based class but an actual world-religions class haha) but now I can't remember what they believe. I'm going to have to Google it. I agree re: the confusion. It "should" help people understand where you're coming from, but I don't think it does. Like if a liberal Episcopalian told me they were a Christian and I didn't know anything else about them, I'm coming to them with my own set of biases so I'm not going to see them as they think I might see them. So it seems pointless. And also, why am I bothering to say ANYTHING at all about my spiritual belief to anyone who isn't very close to me anyway? Hell, I JUST had an in-depth convo with my brother on the issue. So how often do I think I'm going to have to trot out my label in life? @Noumena, thanks! I was paranoid I'd come off like some obsessive psycho. LOL @Noggy, that's largely my feeling on it. It's that and also that I want to remain open to new ideas and concepts and it feels like the second I take a label and start deeply committing to that label, suddenly I'm shutting down all other doors and opportunities for understanding. I guess in a sense I wish to be a student of everything and a follower of nothing. Though that doesn't mean I'm not going to have more in common with some groups than other groups. Like obviously I'm going to feel like most Buddhists "speak my language" more than most Christians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skepticalme Posted December 25, 2011 Share Posted December 25, 2011 I can't say I 'pick' the label I use to describe myself. I didn't choose a label and then taylor my philosophy to conform to it. I find labels that best describe my world view. It works if there are labels in the lexicon that accurately describe you and the rest of society agrees on the definition of those labels. If not, then you encounter the problems that everyone above have described. I've had to explain before that atheist and agnostic are not mutually exclusive and that atheist doesn't mean antitheist, in this case the labels did not serve there purpose. So I understand where you are coming from, I've encountered the same frustrations. I still think labels have their place but can be problematic when misused or misapplied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badpuppy Posted December 25, 2011 Author Share Posted December 25, 2011 I can't say I 'pick' the label I use to describe myself. I didn't choose a label and then taylor my philosophy to conform to it. I find labels that best describe my world view. It works if there are labels in the lexicon that accurately describe you and the rest of society agrees on the definition of those labels. If not, then you encounter the problems that everyone above have described. I've had to explain before that atheist and agnostic are not mutually exclusive and that atheist doesn't mean antitheist, in this case the labels did not serve there purpose. So I understand where you are coming from, I've encountered the same frustrations. I still think labels have their place but can be problematic when misused or misapplied. That was how I was with Buddhism. I had a sort of a list of stuff I believed naturally, and then I kept bumping up against Buddhism. It "is" a close fit, but there is enough that I disagree with that I think I would be trying to mold myself into something I'm not. So I feel for me that it's best not to have a label. Doesn't change what I believe or do, it's just a psychological shift, I think. And yes re: atheist and agnostic, they describe two different things. One is a statement about belief, the other knowledge. Re: labels still have their place... that's why I'll still use the Buddhist label when dealing with family and such. It's so close to my views that I think that's just easier when dealing with them because I don't feel literalistic Christians can understand an ever unfolding/evolving/nomadic spiritual path. To their way of seeing things that means I'm "searching for Jesus", and I feel such a thing would just give them a false sense of hope and would cause them pain. But when I'm here, for example, on this board, I don't need to stick a label on it because it's just a different type of environment. And I think it's really important that I don't "internalize" a label fully because then I'm creating a self-limiting situation and shutting down opportunities to learn and evolve further. One of the points for me with leaving Christianity was embracing the freedom to be authentic. For me, the most authentic thing would be to let go of attachment to labels so I can experience and think and feel in whatever ways are most honest for me. When they bump up against an established orthodoxy/faith system, awesome, we can share something in common, but when they don't, there is no pressure to conform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
izzytheterri Posted December 25, 2011 Share Posted December 25, 2011 THank you for posting this, it's something I often struggle with. Thing is, I WANT a label. For 20 years I was a Christian, and I identified as that. Then when I became an ex-Christian.... well, that means so many things, as you've stated, and sometimes I feel like I don't fit in anywhere. My husband often wonders why I would want a label, and it's difficult to explain, because he never really identified with his catholic upbringing even though he participated in it. But, I felt like Christian was who I was, not what I believed. Losing part of who you are kinda makes a person feel a little lost. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jblueep Posted December 25, 2011 Share Posted December 25, 2011 So... I think I'm going to change my label to: "Free Agent" because it's the least limiting shorthand I can think of. That is the same label 2Honest and I have taken for ourselves...funny thing is the "free agent" label was "prophesied" over us in our last church (as a positive thing)...not sure they knew it meant we would be moving on from them and christianity 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badpuppy Posted December 25, 2011 Author Share Posted December 25, 2011 THank you for posting this, it's something I often struggle with. Thing is, I WANT a label. For 20 years I was a Christian, and I identified as that. Then when I became an ex-Christian.... well, that means so many things, as you've stated, and sometimes I feel like I don't fit in anywhere. My husband often wonders why I would want a label, and it's difficult to explain, because he never really identified with his catholic upbringing even though he participated in it. But, I felt like Christian was who I was, not what I believed. Losing part of who you are kinda makes a person feel a little lost. Yup. And I totally get that with regards to labels. And sometimes I want a label, and I've tried different labels. But I think labels make me more itchy (personally). LOL. So I'm going to experiment with this label-less existence with regards to spirituality and see how it goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badpuppy Posted December 25, 2011 Author Share Posted December 25, 2011 So... I think I'm going to change my label to: "Free Agent" because it's the least limiting shorthand I can think of. That is the same label 2Honest and I have taken for ourselves...funny thing is the "free agent" label was "prophesied" over us in our last church (as a positive thing)...not sure they knew it meant we would be moving on from them and christianity hahaha that's so funny! And oh Gawd, now we might argue over the doctrines of "free agent" and what makes someone a REAL free agent. I might have to duel you to the death for this one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesertBob Posted December 25, 2011 Share Posted December 25, 2011 The truth is that most people don't think that much about their beliefs and aren't interested in knowing in-depth what you believe, so they are going to look for a general category for you and lump you in there and apply whatever associations they please. So I don't waste time agonizing over how to describe myself to others. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badpuppy Posted December 25, 2011 Author Share Posted December 25, 2011 The truth is that most people don't think that much about their beliefs and aren't interested in knowing in-depth what you believe, so they are going to look for a general category for you and lump you in there and apply whatever associations they please. So I don't waste time agonizing over how to describe myself to others. Yes, that's a good point. Which is why in a casual conversation if someone asks I may still default to "Buddhist" for simplicity's sake, or simply tell them it's personal. If it's someone who actually IS interested in knowing in-depth, then they can ask questions and I can answer them without bringing a label into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts