What is Truth? Sociology and Indicators of Self

I get more technical with Sociology. According to sociology, an individual possesses Primary and Secondary Identifiers which account for “who” a person is. Primary and Secondary identifiers, in sociological terms, combine to define the character of a person. Primary identifiers are “Internal” Categories/Fixed or Static Dimensions. Primary Identifiers of diversity are those human differences that are inborn and/or that exert an important impact on our early socialization, and that have an ongoing impact throughout our lives. Specifically, Primary identifiers are Age, Physical Abilities/Qualities, Ethnicity, Gender, Race, and Sexual Orientation. Secondary Identifiers are “External” Categories/Fluid or Dynamic Dimensions. Secondary Identifiers of diversity are those that can be changed, or are at least not inborn. They range from things like parental status to religious belief to marital status to job level. As one studies the various combinations of Identifiers in one’s life, one can determine the reasons behind current belief or action. Further, as one studies another person’s identifiers one can better know the other.

This lesson has had to change in recent years as relativism and subjective Truth become more and more popular in modern ideologies. The line between Primary and Secondary Identifiers seems to blur, increasingly, as people seem to “identify” as whatever they wish. I barely mention this in class, not because I am afraid to discuss it, but because, there just isn’t enough academic understanding of the reasons behind this apparent desire in modern cultures to “self-identify”. It appears to be rooted in dogmatic relativism and the idea that “If it is True to you, then it must be True.” Of course, all rational philosophy deems this concept of relative reasoning as lacking any real logical backing. If the class does move into a discussion of this, I have given students some concepts that may help them rationally approach the subject. I ask them to analyze the “self-identifying” trend in our culture today, and to consider where this comes from. Ultimately, I argue, it comes from the same place where all other social identifying schemes come from: the natural desire to belong…to feel like you are part of a group of people and not alone. In this way, self-identifying does share the same transcendent characteristic of relationship that nearly all sociological identifiers possess. The only difference, I argue, is that self-identifying, as a relativistic philosophy, seems, by definition, self-referential and lacking the requisite acquiescence or humility needed in order to relate to what Christianity understands to be God or the Authentic Self. If we do talk about this in class, my only Hope is that students, at the very least, leave with a little understanding of why relativism and self-identifying ideologies cannot be objectively True in Christian Theology as they are inconsistent with the objective Truths of relationships and humility, that is, Agape.

Statue if St. Francis of Assisi at Our Lady of Lourdes Catholic Church in Denver Colorado. St. Francis understood who he was within the context of his relationship with God, all people, and Creation. (photo P. Smith)

These complex factors of primary and secondary identifiers can be interpreted within the context of a given society in space and time to create dominant and non-dominant categories. Dominant categories are those considered either the majority or the norm in a given society. Non-Dominant categories are those considered the minority or the non-norm in a given society. By studying the dominant and non-dominant assumptions of an individual’s culture, one can better understand an individual’s ideology and assumptions. In this way, one can “know” “the Other”.  Ultimately, this class leads students to the idea that it is not the “self” or the “self-identity” that matters in becoming the Authentic Self; it is the relationships we develop with each other that reveals who our Authentic Self is. Self-referential ideology seems to stop at the self and does not extend to the Other. This is contrary to Christian concepts of who God is and who we are made to be.