Identity, Culture, Ethnicity,
Politics of Recognition
4th Sem EC 4.1 & 5.1
Anindita Chaudhuri
Associate Professor, Dept. of Psychology, Calcutta
University
Identity
Singular - plural
Real - imagined
Individualistic - collective
Characterised by similarities &
differences
Identity
It does not simply exists but continually
Formed & reformed
Created & shaped
by discourse of the Individual and those
around them
Owing to its dialectical nature it is both
individualistic and collective
Dialectical nature of identity influences the
creation and maintenance of collective
social identity as well as individual identity.
Charles Taylor (1994) described this process
as “politics of recognition”.
According to him identity is shaped by
recognition or its absence.
This can be applied to the notion of
sameness and differences.
Thus social categories are
created…….ethnicity, gender,
nationality, religion
The inflexible “natural” categories
Our mind is the seat of this
“communion” , “imagined community”
When people do not receive “recognition” or
feels their identity is under threat, it has
significant impact on their social and
individual identity
Group membership creates in group/self
categorisation and enhancement in ways
that favour in group at the expense of the
out group.
Group categorization is a precursor to
group favouritism( Turner & Tajfel, 1986)
Group membership may help to achieve
the perception of positive self worth by
positively differentiating the in group
from a comparison out group
Quest for “positive distinctness”
Self categorization & social comparison-
accentuation of perceived similarities between
self and in group members/perceived
differences between self and out group
members
Accentuation for all the attitudes, beliefs,
values, affective reactions behavioural norms,
styles of speech etc.
Social categorisation shared by all group
members function as “social stereotypes” and
interpret, explain and even “justify” our
behaviour
Social identity involves a process of
depersonalisation. Here self is perched as
interchangeable with other in group
members
Depersonalization -Cognitive representation
of social category containing the meanings
and norms that the person associates with
the social category
It underlines stereotyping, group
cohesiveness, ethnocentricism, cooperation,
altruism, emotional contagion, collective
action
Collective identity - “one ness”/ “we
ness”
Real/imagined shared attributes
/experiences in relation/contrast to
actual/imagined set of others
Related with development of ethnic
identity
Cultures are not merely an amalgam of specific
behaviors because they include, in addition to activities
of a standard nature, consistent cognitive, perceptual,
motivational, and affective patterns and a distinctive
array of artifacts of human alterations of the
environment. Cultures also are continuous, cumulative,
and progressive (White, 1947).
Brown’s (1991) definition. He maintained that culture
consists of the conventional patterns of thought, activity,
and artifact that are passed on from generation to
generation in a manner that is generally assumed to
involve learning rather specific programming. Besides
being transmitted “vertically” from generation to
generation, culture may also be transmitted
“horizontally” between individuals and collectivities. (p.
40)
Ethnic identity is closely aligned to ego identity and self-
esteem. The social status of a group also can influence
self-esteem; if an ethnic group has experienced a long,
oppressive history of prejudice and discrimination, then
group members could experience a devalued sense of self
(Tajfel, 1981). The self-image, however, is significantly
influenced by one’s evaluation of the group—if the
evaluation is positive, then commitment is strong,
contentment is high, and involvement in ethnic behaviors
and practices is significant, therefore allowing one to
achieve a strong secure identity with the group (Phinney,
1991). But if the evaluation is negative, then involvement,
preferences, contentment, and commitment will be
minimal in these instances; multiethnic individuals will
seek ways to pass as members of other groups or
denigrate the value of the group by forging relations with
related subgroups.
Phinney’s theory (1990)of ethnic identity
Identification with the majority group can be strong
(1)or weak(2)
Identification with the minority group can also be
strong (3)or weak(4)
Now 1 & 3 I.e strong identification with majority group
and strong with minority group - Accultured/bicultural
1 & 4 -Assimilated
2 & 1 -ethnically embedded/separated
2 & 2 - Marginalised
Cross (1971)
1. Pre-encounter, in which the process of identification is
formed and directed to a group;
2. Encounter, in which individuals decide they need a change
in their sense of ethnic self- awareness that is influenced by significant
events;
3. Immersion-Emersion, in which old and new identities
create a struggle for the individuals;
4. Internalization, in which the newly adopted identity
becomes accepted; and
5. Internalization-Commitment, the ultimate stage in which
ethnicity is salient and is an integral part of one’s daily life.
Helms’s racial identity model (Helms, 1989, 1990)
Racial identity, however, refers to the psychological
mechanisms that people develop to function
effectively in a society where so people enjoy social
and political advantage because of their or their
ancestors’ (presumed) physical appearance, but
others suffer disadvantage and lower status for the
same reasons. Thus, racial identity is essentially
imposed by political and economic forces and
typically is based on easily recognizable
characteristics, whereas ethnic identity is chosen
and may be invisible to people who are not
members of the relevant ethnic group.
Politics of Recognition
By
Charles Taylor
Our identity is partly shaped by recognition or
its absence, often by the mis-recognition of
others, and so a person or group of people can
suffer real damage, real distortion, if the people
or society around them mirror back to them a
confining or demeaning or contemptible picture
of themselves. Nonrecognition or mis-
recognition can inflict harm, can be a form of
oppression, imprisoning someone in a false,
distorted, and reduced mode of being.
Mis-recognition shows not just a lack of due
respect. It can inflict a grievous wound,
saddling its victims with a crippling self-
hatred. Due recognition is not just a
courtesy we owe people. It is a vital human
need.
“dignity of human beings”
individualized identity
Authenticity- socially derived position.
Dialogical not monological. Importance of
significant others
On the intimate level, we can see how much
an original identity needs and is vulnerable to
the recognition given or withheld by
significant others. It is not surprising that in
the culture of authenticity, relationships are
seen as the key loci of self-discovery and self-
affirmation. Love relationships are not just
important because of the general emphasis
in modern culture on the fulfillments of
ordinary needs. They are also crucial because
they are the crucibles of inwardly generated
identity.
On the social plane, the understanding that identities are formed
in open dialogue, unshaped by a predefined social script, has
made the politics of equal recognition more central and stressful.
It has, in fact, considerably raised the stakes. Equal recognition is
not just the appropriate mode for a healthy democratic society. Its
refusal can inflict damage on those who are denied it, according to
a widespread modern view, as I indicated at the outset. The
projection of an inferior or demeaning image on another can
actually distort and oppress, to the extent that the image is
internalized. Not only contemporary feminism but also race
relations and discussions of multiculturalism are undergirded by
the premise that the withholding of recognition can be a form of
oppression. We may debate whether this factor has been
exaggerated, but it is clear that the understanding of identity and
authenticity has introduced a new dimension into the politics of
equal recognition, which now operates with some- thing like its
own notion of authenticity, at least so far as the denunciation of
other-induced distortions is concerned.
Recognition of the equal value of
different cultures
