Labelling

Labelling or labeling is describing someone or something in a word or short phrase.^[1] For example, describing someone who has broken a law as a criminal. Labelling theory is a theory in sociology which ascribes labelling of people to control and identification of deviant behaviour. It has been argued that labelling is necessary for communication.^[2] However, the use of the term is often intended to highlight the fact that the label is a description applied from the outside, rather than something intrinsic to the labelled thing. This can be done for several reasons:

• To provoke a discussion about what the best description is
• To reject a particular label
• To reject the whole idea that the labelled thing can be described in a short phrase.

This last usage can be seen as an accusation that such a short description is overly-reductive.

Giving something a label can be seen as positive, but the term label is not usually used in this case. For example, giving a name to a common identity is seen as essential in identity politics.

Labelling is often equivalent to pigeonholing or the use of stereotypes and can suffer from the same problems as these activities.

The labelling of people can be related to a reference group. For example, the labels black and white are related to black people and white people; the labels young and old are related to young people and old people.

The labelling of works of art can be related to genre. For example, a piece of music may be described as progressive rock or indie or ragga jungle drum and bass. However, there are other labels that can be applied to a work, such as derivative, low or high. The use of the word labelling is less common in the context of works of art than people. However, it also often represents the rejection of a label. For example, an artist may feel that the labeller is attempting to restrict the scope of the artist's work to that which is covered by the label.

Labelling system on the World Wide Web

Labelling on the Web represent the chunks of information in our information environments. In an information environment, labels occur in 2 formats: textual and iconic.^[3]

Labelling in argumentation

In context of argumentation and debate, labelling a debator or position is often (whether consciously or unconsciously) used as a "red herring" to divert or dismiss the argument, instead of valid argumentation. Often in the form of ad hominem association fallacy aiming at accrediting or discrediting the argument or the debator by associating them with an emotionally charged label. Typically negatively; labelling it as ridiculous or despicable, though it can also go the other way round; attempting to gain sympathy for example by promoting the debator or position as authoritative, or by appealing to pity. - Using labelling in argumentation this way constitute an informal fallacy. - For example:

The guy believed that it can be done with the right technology.

• The guy is a perverted pansy. (ie. Therefor it can never be done.)

The witness claim to have seen something that indicates foul play.

• It is paranoid to assume foul play. (ie. Therefor whatever the witness might have seen is irrelevant.)

Markings indicate that it was done with a crowbar. - And secondly, Mr X is a suspect..

• It is ridiculous to suspect mr X. (ie. Therefor it is also ridiculous to assume it was done with a crowbar.)

It has been suggested that something it said in the book could be wrong.

• It is a very noble book. (ie. Therefor the suggestion is wrong.)

See also

• Archetype
• Association fallacy
• Attributional bias
• Discrimination
• Labelling theory
• Name calling
• Pigeonholing
• Social stigma

References