3 ms·

> If I said something like "Asian" instead of "Caucasian" it would definitely be lying because I don't actually identify as Asian. What if you did that day? Is

> If I said something like "Asian" instead of "Caucasian" it would definitely be lying because I don't actually identify as Asian. What if you did that day? Is there a need for a long term self-identification to qualify as the minority of your choosing?

prewett 7y ago
The question as commonly understood is asking about your family geographical/cultural heritage. Your family heritage is constant. So unless new information has come to light recently or you're really confused about your heritage, I don't think it makes sense to be changing your ethnicity/race on a daily basis. One could feel Asian because you're in a Chinese immersion program speaking Chinese 24/7, but if you don't have any ancestors from Asia more recent than Ghengis Khan, you can't really self-identify as Asian for the purposes of the question as commonly understood. It's not like one's family heritage changes if one's circumstances change.
- nradov 7y ago
  There is no such common understanding. Everyone has their own subjective understanding of such questions. Who are we to judge whether they're right or wrong. Please justify your assertion that self identification of being Asian should be cut off based on ancestry at 1227. It seems awfully arbitrary. Do you actually have a logical reason for picking that year, or are you just making things up to suit your own preferences?
  - prewett 7y ago
    Language is common understanding (within boundaries). Sure, there is subjective understanding, but only to a point. As I understand it, the concept of ancestry in English implies a certain immutability. You can't be Asian today and African tomorrow. You can't identify as Eskimo one day and Pacific Islander the next (barring a rather unusual situation). You can't change identity like clothes. There are words for people who do that, though, "actor" being the kindest. If you want to redefine the meanings of these terms, fine, but then we're no longer using the same words, even if the syllables happen to sound the same. I never said 1227 and don't know why you are picking that year. I picked Genghis Khan because supposedly most everyone has some of his genes.
tdb7893 7y ago
Identity is more than just saying you are an identity, it's a reflection of how you actually see yourself. If you actually see yourself differently then you can actually change what you identify as. This means you need to actually see yourself differently to not be lying and you can't just pick and choose based on a whim. For example I'm a huge nerd and even if I tell people I don't identify as one it doesn't change how I see myself so it's just a lie. Though as time goes on I'm doing less and less nerdy hobbies so I feel less a part of that group so in the future I might not feel like a nerd at all so if I say I don't identify as a nerd then I'm telling the truth. Doing what you are saying requires being able to actually believe you are part of those different groups.
- nradov 7y ago
  Define your terms. How does one differentiate between a whim versus a deeply held belief? Is there a time limit involved? Some objective measure of sincerity? "It's not a lie if you believe it." - George Constanza

prewett 7y ago

The question as commonly understood is asking about your family geographical/cultural heritage. Your family heritage is constant. So unless new information has come to light recently or you're really confused about your heritage, I don't think it makes sense to be changing your ethnicity/race on a daily basis. One could feel Asian because you're in a Chinese immersion program speaking Chinese 24/7, but if you don't have any ancestors from Asia more recent than Ghengis Khan, you can't really self-identify as Asian for the purposes of the question as commonly understood. It's not like one's family heritage changes if one's circumstances change.

nradov 7y ago
There is no such common understanding. Everyone has their own subjective understanding of such questions. Who are we to judge whether they're right or wrong. Please justify your assertion that self identification of being Asian should be cut off based on ancestry at 1227. It seems awfully arbitrary. Do you actually have a logical reason for picking that year, or are you just making things up to suit your own preferences?
- prewett 7y ago
  Language is common understanding (within boundaries). Sure, there is subjective understanding, but only to a point. As I understand it, the concept of ancestry in English implies a certain immutability. You can't be Asian today and African tomorrow. You can't identify as Eskimo one day and Pacific Islander the next (barring a rather unusual situation). You can't change identity like clothes. There are words for people who do that, though, "actor" being the kindest. If you want to redefine the meanings of these terms, fine, but then we're no longer using the same words, even if the syllables happen to sound the same. I never said 1227 and don't know why you are picking that year. I picked Genghis Khan because supposedly most everyone has some of his genes.

tdb7893 7y ago

Identity is more than just saying you are an identity, it's a reflection of how you actually see yourself. If you actually see yourself differently then you can actually change what you identify as. This means you need to actually see yourself differently to not be lying and you can't just pick and choose based on a whim. For example I'm a huge nerd and even if I tell people I don't identify as one it doesn't change how I see myself so it's just a lie. Though as time goes on I'm doing less and less nerdy hobbies so I feel less a part of that group so in the future I might not feel like a nerd at all so if I say I don't identify as a nerd then I'm telling the truth. Doing what you are saying requires being able to actually believe you are part of those different groups.

nradov 7y ago
Define your terms. How does one differentiate between a whim versus a deeply held belief? Is there a time limit involved? Some objective measure of sincerity? "It's not a lie if you believe it." - George Constanza