What Might It Mean For A Person Or A Society To Have Multiple Identities?

Name:
Professor’s Name:
Course:
Date:
Multiple Identities
Diversity is a term that has been overused and at times misused by the world leaders. The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines diversity as “the condition of having or being composed of differing elements.” So, to be diverse is to encompass different facets or aspects which make the whole. Today, people talk of having multiple identities but never understand what it means to have multiple identities. Some say it means to be diverse while others say it is the aspect of being or having more than one personality. In a world where people marry from every corner of the world, others adopt different cultures as they travel, while others speak different languages, having a single identity is proving difficult. We live in a world where a person wants to be identified as Chinese, Christian, and millennial. Such a scenario adds to the complexity of the matter at hand. However, what these things have done is to help the world embrace the different cultures and differences in people. There have been complications as it has often been difficult to develop the rules of engagement. But, thus far, the world appears to be more tolerant of each other and growing coherent. In this paper, the author seeks to explain the notion of multiple identities while also stating how these are defined and how they ought to be protected and maintained.
For a person or society to be said to have more identities, it means they identify with more than one facet or aspect or attribute of the world. For example, a person can be Indian, living in America, a monk, and have one parent with French heritage. These facets or attributes help to define who this person is. The said individual cannot be captured or defined well if all the above aspects of his identity are not recognized. To have a complete understanding of the person, all his attributes have to be taken into consideration regardless of which aspect appears to be strongly highlighted. In his article, Smith (2009) talks of how he spoke in two voices. Having come from Scotland, he had the privilege of using the Scottish and British tongues (he spoke in both accents). “At home, during the holidays, I spoke with my old voice, and in the old voice seemed to speak things I couldn’t express in college, and vice versa.” Smith was essentially two different people who not only spoke differently but also had different mannerisms which could be understood by those around him. While at home, he could be his old self again but when he went back to school, he knew he had to switch back to the Smith people were used to seeing and interacting with there. For some time, he adopted both identities, but as he explains, this did not last long which helps to lay bare the danger of neglecting the duty of protecting or maintaining multiple identities. Even though Appiah (2018) takes a different approach, he does come to a similar conclusion as Smith in his explanation of multiple identities. While explaining the situation in Singapore, Appiah talks of how the government of the land forced its people to adopt multiple identities. He notes that after the British left, the government decided to make English the official language. So,...