The Problem with Labels…

The purpose of language is to communicate. Words have meaning, which enable us to share ideas and experiences with each other effectively. What you’re reading right now is an example of this very phenomenon of communication; you are able to understand what I’m saying because you can read, you understand the English language, and the words and phraseology you’re reading have meaning, which both you and I understand. That’s the key. It is our shared understanding of the language—what words and phrases mean—that enables this communication. Without it, this would all be meaningless symbols on a page to you.

In general, communication through language works reasonably well, but I’m fairly sure both you and I have had experiences where we have failed to understand what another person means when they say something. How often do we hear the words “that’s not what I meant”? In my experience, this happens quite often, but it’s usually very easily corrected by a simple clarification. Usually.

However, when it comes to the labels that people apply to themselves and to others, describing either their political or their religious views, effective communication can be extremely difficult. When someone identifies as a “Christian”, without any further qualification, there is very little I can safely assume about them. They could be a fire and brimstone fundamentalist, who believes every word of the Bible is literally true and that anyone who doesn’t accept Christ (no matter how good they are otherwise) is going to burn forever in hell; they could be an exceedingly liberal Christian, who doesn’t think that the Bible is inerrant, who doesn’t even believe in hell, and may not even think that Jesus was divine; or they could be absolutely anything in between. The word “Christian” is so vague and can apply to such a huge range of beliefs of such varying extremity, that it tells us almost nothing. Unfortunately, not many people seem to realise this and are happy to identify themselves by the label “Christian”, without any further qualification, and expect other people to know exactly what they mean. And yet, these people get upset when somebody points out something bad that “Christians” have been doing. For instance, some will tell you that it was the “Catholics”—not “Christians”—who were responsible for the Crusades, or that people who commit violent crimes in the name of their religion, or those who are just generally horrible to others for religious reasons are “not true Christians”. If I only had a penny for every time I’ve heard somebody say something like that…

This is the problem with labels. People use them to mean something specific, but it’s often very unclear what they actually mean. If you’re trying to communicate with someone about a particular issue and you don’t define the terms you’re using, it’s very easy to just end up talking past each other. For instance, when I use the word “liberal”, I’m pretty sure I mean something very different to what Bill O’Reilly means when he uses it. From my perspective, through a pretty well-studied understanding of liberalism rooted in its philosophical origins, its history, and its modern usage, liberalism is nothing more and nothing less than the political manifestation of the principles of individual liberty, whereby government action should be aimed at increasing the amount of freedom that people have as far as possible or practical. Yet, if you listen to folks like O’Reilly or any of the other commentators on the American political right, you’d be absolutely convinced that liberals are out to take away everyone’s freedom. Indeed, for many of these folks, “liberalism”, “left-wing”, and “socialism” are interchangeable… and they don’t even really seem to understand what any of these terms actually mean, nor do they care how people who actually identify with these labels define them.

How can you communicate with someone about matters of politics or religion if the label you wish to identify with means something completely different to them than it does to you? It’s not necessarily impossible, of course; but where it can be done, it sure is difficult and very time consuming, requiring us to sometimes set labels aside and just focus on what we actually think, to explain what you believe and why, as the hosts on The Atheist Experience tend to ask their callers to do. Unfortunately, the advantage of a label is also it’s curse; it’s simple, it saves time, and removes the need for an extended explanation, which makes it perfect for people who are too intellectually lazy to want to bother with really understanding what it is that people actually believe when it is so much simpler to just put a label on them and assume you know everything you need to know.

That said, I do use labels; it is simply impractical to try to communicate without them, and I think most people, even the most well-informed and intellectual among us, do. However, when people don’t understand what I mean when I use labels, I will try to clarify as best as I can.