Labeling Theory and Change

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labeling_theory

Labeling theory is the theory of how the self-identity and behavior of individuals may be determined or influenced by the terms used to describe or classify them. It is associated with the concepts of self-fulfilling prophecy and stereotyping.

Labeling theory, the proposition that humans are influenced and mold themselves to what we classify them.

On the other hand, you have people who choose to adopt labels or beliefs in order to validate their existence or as a form of ego protection.

I think a good question is, how capable of change are we? If we do not change is it because we are unable to, or because we do not really wish to?

I have been unable to change. Sometimes I want to, sometimes I don't. Alexithymia makes it hard to say if I really want to change.

I think a good question is the one of whether or not we have freewill. I don't think we do, but I'm not sure free will is desirable, either.

That’s a good question, personally I think anyone who is alive is capable of change even if to a small degree.

I’ve also said this many times on here before that I think people become their disorder, rather they let it define them rather than trying to refuse to let it define them. I don’t think it’s necessary approached that way but the results are essentially the same.

For instance my argument with ASPD is ok you get charged with a crime, it involves another person and is considered a violent crime. Now show not concern for your own situation than the emotional conditions of the victim (lack of empathy). If they ask why you did what you did say I just reacted (impulsivity). You’ve well exceeded the three symptoms needed for a diagnosis. Does this mean you are a hard core sociopath incapable of change? No, these people exist, I’ve known them I believe even they could change but they just only know one lifestyle so that’s why they never do. Add to the fact their reputation is ruined by criminal history and it becomes a vicious.

Same goes for other disorders as well,

I think that there is some truth in the labeling theory.
In a broader sense, I get the feeling that we create ourselves through our deepest beliefs about us, even when we aren't aware of them. And our deepest beliefs can come before the other labels and interact with them.

This is why another interesting question could be: what are our deepest beliefs about ourselves?

About free will: I assume (I hope!) that this theory does not relate to our ego, but to the power of our deepest soul. It would be actually unreasonable to think that our ego has a total free will, but our deepest soul has actually a great power and a stronger “free will”, I don't know if it is absolute.

Anyhow, I think that our ego has a limited free will and I assume that this can be increased with practice.

slither wrote:I'm not sure free will is desirable, either.

I share with you my hunch, I hope it can be useful and sorry if it isn't correct.

If you are not sure free will is desirable, then you have no free will, or not always,
because your free will (the free will of a deeper part of you) is: “I don't want free will!”

I am currently of the opinion that labelling only matters to the point where it can aid in therapy otherwise it lacks point. AsPD and psychopathy are so similar in therapeutic approach that it matters little to differenciate. Even in the case of therapy, individual personality dictates treatment and as such labels are only a really rough guideline.

The problem with any label is that people tend to bond to its identity. I've known people who have been diagnosed with one thing and at a later point get diagnosed with another and are furious because with the change of labels comes a loss of some identity.

Another problem is that prior to even having a label, someone may bond to its identity. This leaves room for misdiagnosis because they are heading into rooms listing the DSM traits that they identify with instead of getting a proper diagnosis based on their own issues.

If less emphasis is placed on labels (which it usually is in psychotherapy) people open up as individuals.

I think the media is partly to blame because it tends to glamourise mental illness.

^While I agree that applying a label can indeed make a person conform to a set of behaviours, because they're expected, it can also have the reverse affect.

Being given a label myself, I've always resisted being classified into a box and have spent much of my adult life 'proving' that it's wrong, by attempting to take control over my behaviour and choices.

It's a two-edged sword, because as much as I can pat myself on the back for what I've managed to achieve, I'm also fully aware that it's still a con, to the extent that I use processes and people to compensate for my shortcomings, which makes the label generally true.

The issue is that they call the behaviours pervasive which people take to mean all encompassing. They’re not. Even when defined by the box it’s only that cluster of behaviours they’re looking at. There’s plenty outside of it that can be fostered. Boxing off the maladaptive traits might be useful so long as you don’t only identify with them.

I think it comes down to strength of mind.

If you're weak-minded and are handed a diagnosis, then there's a tendency to hold onto it, because it gives a person an identity. I guess it's a form of mirroring. It also provides an excuse as to why you're not doing more: "I can't help it; I have an illness / condition" which is then all encompassing, as you've mentioned.

If you're strong-minded then you'll resist being pigeon-holed into a basket: "I am not a number, I am a free man" type of thing.

Why anyone would want to associate with a label such as AsPD, or any of the others for that matter, I don't know; it's like putting up your hand when you see some failed cretin and saying, "Me too!"

It's a warped form of virtue signalling. I'm an emotionally resilient, bold, assertive, freeminded dominant (who don't need no man). I've done badass things, can charm and woo and get what I want. I may or may not have killed a man-- wouldn't you like to know (wink nudge).

Always happens that the people who want to identify this way don't actually have the behaviours that would constitute malfunction or maladaptation or disorder. NPD is a weird exception but then they don't identify with the clusters of behaviours native to their own disorder

solemnlysworn wrote:It's a warped form of virtue signalling. I'm an emotionally resilient, bold, assertive, freeminded dominant (who don't need no man). I've done badass things, can charm and woo and get what I want. I may or may not have killed a man-- wouldn't you like to know (wink nudge).

Always happens that the people who want to identify this way don't actually have the behaviours that would constitute malfunction or maladaptation or disorder. NPD is a weird exception but then they don't identify with the clusters of behaviours native to their own disorder

Maybe. Whether or not the behaviours are true or not, the person is still wishing to be associated with a label that's been applied by someone else. Some f*ckwit has made a box, which many seem happy to climb into. Very conformist for a condition that inherently lacks conformity.