I have a lot of trouble with labels. Personal labels that is. Oh, I know, they are important to our way of life, and there are some that I like to hang around my neck. It’s nice, for example, to be labeled a senior and get discounts at restaurants. Or to be labeled a grandfather, a retiree, or a fireman. Lots of labels are nice to be able to wear. Those are the ones that describe only one aspect of yourself, or maybe a condition that is only temporary. However, labels that become more all-encompassing and attempt to pin down the basic you or what goes on in your head really give me trouble..
Labels dealing with faith or the lack of it are the most difficult. Even political labels are not so bad. I wouldn’t mind being called a liberal, for example. But call me a Christian and I’m liable to get angry; or call me an atheist and I’m liable to say “now hold on a moment….” The problem is, well, really there are two problems. First, many labels, especially those dealing with “faith” are too restrictive. When you try to wear them, they begin to pinch like new shoes that are a size too small. They may describe a part of you, or a part of what they mean may fit you but not the rest, or other people may have a different understanding of what the label means. The result is that the label does little to describe the real you and may, in fact be quite misleading.
Labels tend to be absolute, brokering no wiggle room. As such they come in two opposite types: affirmative labels, like Christian, and denial labels like Atheist. Denial labels do little to explain what you are, only what you are not. Affirmative labels have denial aspects too, since claiming to be a Christian, denies belief in many other things.
The problem really asserts itself when ideas are turned into labels. I applaud the concept of agnosticism, for example, but would balk at my spiritual understanding to be limited by such a label for I am also an ignostic (or a theological noncognitivist, if you prefer) because I believe that before you even approach the problem of proving that He exists, you first have to define the word “God”, and ignostics believe that is impossible.
While I can claim acceptance of any of these ideas, I cannot accept them as defining labels. In that respect, I think that denial labels are probably worse than affirmative labels since they end to be more confining that affirmative labels and do very little to explain who or what you really are.
But even the affirmative labels have their limitations. In the past I have considered myself a Gnostic; have greatly admired Buddhists, and even considered myself a Christian at one time. I later leaned toward Pantheism and, finally, the Humanist way of thinking.
The problem remains, however, that none of these labels really fit properly, although some come very close. Pantheists, Humanists and Buddhists, for example, deny the existence of God, in that respect they are all Atheistic and probably Agnostic and Ignostic as well. Buddhists however, accept the concept of consciousness surviving the death of the body, while Pantheists and Humanists tend to deny all spiritual concepts. It really becomes impossible to find a label that perfect;y fits my personal view of reality. And therein lies the problem. Any label broad enough in scope to accommodate ones beliefs would be so fuzzy as to be useless.
The concept of god may be at the root of the problem, since most faith labels are referenced to God in some way, as if that were the basis of all religious thought. I disagree. While the idea of God is important to any discussion of religion, and will be tossed around for millennium to come, He is not the prime concept behind 99 out of 100 religions. The idea that consciousness can survive the death of the material body is death is, for if you don’t believe that your consciousness will still exist after your body returns to the earth, then all other religious discussion is meaningless. Nothing else matters and even God becomes impotent. Perhaps, then, more “faith” labels should focus on that concept rather than on the existence or non-existence of God.
So… in the end, what label could I pin on myself? I don’t know. I guess I’ll have to make one up. But then, what use is that. Labels are meant to convey a description of yourself to others. If I pin a label on myself that only I know the definition of, what use can it be? I guess I’ll just have to be content with Humanist for the time being, after all, it does come closer than anything else.
