> For starters, while economists tend to view a job as a straightforward exchange of labor for money, a wide body of sociological research shows how tied up wor

> For starters, while economists tend to view a job as a straightforward exchange of labor for money, a wide body of sociological research shows how tied up work is with a sense of purpose and identity. This is precisely why handing the reins over to sociologists would be dangerous. The concept of "identity" is massively over-valued in our society, with very little coherent critical commentary available. Somehow it's seen as an unassailable, unquestionable truism: every person has an identity, and they build on it throughout their entire life. Giving sociologist-types more power to shape policy will lead to an increase in the acceptance and enforcement of this erroneous thought process. Erroneous because one's "identity" is, in reality, of extremely limited utility and the source of much suffering: does my identity properly reflect who I really am? Are others being respectful to my identity? Are they behaving correctly toward me considering my identity? Is my identity subject to systematic oppression? Should I change my identity or keep it the same? How many people know about my current identity vs. my precious identity that I promoted for many years? Spending time ruminating and basing policy on this concept of identity is a huge waste of resources, and what's the outcome? Pure, unadulterated suffering. Identity has its place as a tool for conducting transactions and working in groups, but sociologists and their ilk have elevated it to an all-encompassing life-defining concern, and that's just not reasonable. Given how much we're already burdening ourselves here in the West with identity politics and other massive wastes of resources, I cringe at the thought of sociologists having MORE power over our lives.