Politics and Legality of Naming: Discrimination and Exclusion
25, February, 2012
This is a brief research result, 22 years of research observation. 100% accurate. A meticulously referenced analytical, descriptive and prescriptive article with further examples and attention to knowledge of details will be published in a later date.
Full name: Abdulkarim Hasan Abdullah: http://karimhasan.wordpress.com/about/
Commonly known as: Karim Hasan
karim.hasan@hotmail.com; karim.hasan2@gmail.com
PhD candidate, Sociology (2004 – 2008, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario)
Master of Arts, Sociology (2004, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario)
Master of Arts, Legal Studies/Political Science (2002, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario)
Bachelor of Arts with Honours, Law: Policy and Government (2000, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario).
Abstract
The ways in which names and naming of individuals are viewed and interacted with in Canada in the formal and informal spheres of life need review, adjustment, sanctions and prohibition. According to a university of British Columbia research (2009, Oreopoulos) people who have English names, and I add more familiar names, have better chance in getting interviews and getting hired for the same ‘job – work, position’ than people who have non-English names with more extensive work experience and higher education. What is a “name”? What is “nominalism”? Are all of us “nominalists”? What are possible remedies for problems, injustices caused by unreasonable, prejudicial practices of “valid nominalism” and “invalid nominalism”? What are the consequences of “false nominalism” and “invalid nominalism”?
1. Introduction
This research paper mainly focuses on the scope and the scale of “nominalism” and it’s validly in relations to political rationality and legality of naming: discrimination and exclusion. It provides analysis of “nominalism” in practice about social, political and economic consequences of “invalid nominalism”, and “false nominalism”. It proposes two remedies, first, Charter legal justice remedy; second “economic rationalism” remedy to invalid irrational nominal fallacies. ‘What is in a name’ – a name makes reference to what, which burdens employers to make such discriminatory and exclusionary decisions against certain job applicants with certain names? Who decides? How, why, when such discriminatory and exclusionary decisions are made about a person, an entity on the grounds of their name? What is work – occupation?
How and why ‘work – occupation’ is fundamental activity – component of being human? Is the only purpose of work accumulation of capital and material goods? ‘Work’ is fundamental to the successful fulfillment of human life for purpose of monetary and financial gains, for the purpose of production, creativity, and continuation of orderly productive life. According to Habermas (1972) “Work” is fundamentally linked to “language and power” that are together constituent parts of “transcendental necessity of self-preservation”, which is one of the five theses of theory and practices of “knowledge constitutive” interests and needs of human beings ‘will to action’.
The first thesis is that “The achievement of the transcendental subjects has their basis in the natural history of human species” (Habermas, 1972:312). Second, he explains this thesis imposes that “reason is an organ of adaptation for men just as claws and teeth are for animals” (Habermas 1972: 312). In this perspective, reason is an organic-equipment and a resource that has rescued ‘men’ from the hardships and threats of “state of nature”. In addition, reason has enabled ‘men’ to organize social and cultural systems of ‘self-preservation’.
The sophistication of the human faculty of reason is liked to the idea of human natural evolution and transcendence from “the state of nature” to “rational human”. ‘Knowledge-constitutive’ interest comprise activities of the human cognitive processes which are related to the intention of planning ‘just social systems’, “for it is subject to the criterion of what a society intends as the good life” (Habermas, 1972: 313). The third thesis explicates that “knowledge equally serves as an instrument and transcends self-preservation” (Habermas, 1972: 313).
Hence, transcendental necessity of ‘self-preservation’ gives rise to the need for three categories of knowledge: first, information, practical knowledge; interpretation, hermeneutics; and free consciousness, hypostatised power. “Work knowledge” is technical-informational, practical knowledge is interpretive-hermeneutic, and power knowledge is active – authoritative, which in certain instances are ‘egoistic’. “Work” operates on principles of technical knowledge, prediction, precision, skills, and experience of theoretical and practical knowledge, which ensures the highest performance of instrumental causal explanation based on positivistic, scientific, empirical, and analytical methods.
Then, I without a doubt claim that “nominal”, “nominalist” practices and principles are not required criterion for competent, successful, productive workforce. Henceforth, prejudicial judgements and decisions on grounds of “names and nominals” are harmful to principles of justice and ‘economic rationalism’, similar to racism, ethnocentrism, sexism, which impose exclusionary measures leading to similar problems caused by racism, sexism, ethno-religious exclusions…etc.
This paper is divided into four sections. Section one provides discussion, explanation, analysis of “dynamic nominalism” (Hacking, 2002), which is a very important, most competent, well-known “valid theory of nominalism”, that makes sense of the system of knowledge production, knowledge articulation, knowledge organization. It makes sense of the world around us, puts the human societies in knowledgeable intelligible perspective, a dynamic living system which we constitute and reconstitute constantly. Are we all “nominalists”? Section two focuses on “nominalism”, in particular “nominalism” in everyday life, as it constitutes and reconstitutes practices, the uses and application of practical reason, a sphere in which prejudicial practices are more likely to occur. Section three provides an analysis and discussion of social, political and economic consequences of “invalid nominalist” fallacies.
The last section provides a brief Charter legal remedy, and “economic rationalist” solution, which do make a valid case for inclusion of prohibition against unfair, unreasonable discriminatory judgements on grounds of a person’s and an entity’s name in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and Canadian Bill of Rights. The “economic rationalist” remedy relies on the logical cost-benefit analysis and technical expertise which derives its validity from cost and demand in the market workforce that operates on principles of skillful, experienced, capable expert workers who have advanced knowledge, whose main task are action on principles of maximizing surplus and profit on grounds of valid legal and fair economic activities.
Only, when reasonably, demonstrably justified and prescribed in the limitations set out in law, Charter of Rights and Freedoms, precedent, judicial interpretations, certain names may be excluded in legal admissibility. For example, we all agree that no person or entity would be allowed to carry a name, or label him or her self “terror” and “terrorism” legally. Any person or entity that carries the title, name of “terror” and “terrorism” do have legal bearing, and legally-criminally liable, their liabilities are defined and judged in the courts of law by judicial application and interpretation of statutory law and precedent. Other than limitations on such words, names and expressions which invoke and provoke violence, any limitations that are out-casting, stigmatizing of names and labels must be illegal and prohibited in the interests of ‘principles of justice’ and ‘economic rationalism’.
2. Nominalism: Its Scope and Scale of Validity
In this section, a discussion and an analysis of two main approaches of “nominalism” (Hacking, 2002) will be provided. Systemic practical “nominalism” contains valid and invalid components. Analyzing the scope and scale of “nominalism”, and their validity are practices that require definitional frameworks that do explain functional capacity of “nominalism” which allow us preparing provisions of conclusive test about validity of “nominalism” as a method and an approach for organizing, categorizing, classifying the world of things and human societies.
What is “nominalism”? Hacking (2002) does characterize his own work as “dynamic nominalism”, the most sophisticated form of nominalism, which reproduces, reconstitutes and develops theoretical and practical methods for understanding the objects in the universe and the world of human activities in a dynamic manner that practices dialects of reason and renewal. “Nominalism” is a branch of philosophical investigation that has emerged in the medieval period, in the work of Ockham (1957), which was a particular critical interpretation of Aristotle’s deterministic, essentialist philosophy and harmonious ordered world (Gosselin, 1990: 1). The challenge for Ockham was to question the order and the nature of things, taking epistemological approach based on “the principle of primacy of the individual; [and claiming that] reality consists of individual substances that can be directly known by intuition and without mediation of nature or essences” (Gosselin, 1990: 2).
This particular model of epistemology opens a different possibility for making “things” and “objects” knowable. On the one hand, “dynamic nominalism” is in sharp contrast and disagreement with essentialism and determinism which are characteristics of Aristotelian teleologies; it opposes realism for two reasons. First, it questions the universal concepts and names; second, it argues that generalized concepts and names cannot be made intelligible. In neither example, in fixed general principles, premise of meanings of names and nominals do not reflect the reality, characteristics, property and quality of their meanings.
Name and naming are organization, recognition and identification method – practice, the meaning which we have attached to certain names are simply of our own making. They do not express and do not make reference to the actual, to the real properties, and characteristics of names in practice. For example, we, the human society, the English nation, do not know, how and why, have decided to name “stone, stone”. Similarly the equivalent of “stone” in all other languages and cultures has been named at some point in time for which no logical, no rational explanation is available about why and how they have decided to name “stone”, for example, in Kurdish, “bard”.
Has there ever been a decision making process of naming a natural object like “stone”? No. Language is a dynamic and living symbolic means of communication. The objects, activities, living and non-living beings, which have emerged and have become known to us in more recent times, have been named, classified, categorized either among the world of non-living or living beings, in living system of human active social, political and economic processes which constitute societies as they emerge and re-emerge. Although, we have living memory and written knowledge of the recent objects, things, human activities which we have named, generally we have better explanations for which why and how we arrived at certain conclusion of naming them certain names; however, not all processes were rational and fair, not all names may be explained, in abstract terms those names in the former are as meaningless as those in the latter categories.
It is the cultural, historical, experiential, memory texts and contexts which provide meaning of “good”, “bad” “likeable”, or “unlikable names”. Hence, we must be careful with prejudicial practices, exclusionary measures which particular cultures, histories, experiences and memories do impose; they must be assessed against principles of justice and fairness. Thus, evaluating assessing names, nominals and practices of “nominalism” are more complicated than many people assume to be, as Gosselin argues “it is a very common simplification to identify nominalism with a theory that rejects universals…What is forgotten is the premise from which this follows, namely the principle of the epistemological primacy of the particular”.
Hacking acknowledges that Kuhn did advance nominalism whose work focused on scientific revolution in relations to the ways in which, we make up the natural world. He argues that “In natural science, our investigation of categories does not ‘really’ change the way the world works…But in social phenomena we may generate kinds of people and kinds of actions as we devise new classifications and categories (Hacking, 2002:40). By this point, he claims that we make people in a clearer sense than we make the natural world. The space of possibilities of making up people lies in the question of ‘nominalism’ and history of “the object of social sciences – people and groups – are constituted by historical process, while the objects of that natural sciences, particular experimental apparatus, are created in time, but in some sense, they are not constituted historically” (Hacking, 2002: 40).
In the construction of “dynamic nominalism”, Hacking uses Bachelard’s epistemology thresholds, which have been deployed by Foucault in archaeological and genealogical works. Bachelard’s epistemological thresholds suspend the continuous accumulation of knowledge, cut the unconditional structure of truths, and interrupt the transcendental developments of knowledge. According to Kusch, “Bachelard’s epistemology emphasized revolutions, breaks and discontinues in the history of natural sciences (Kusch, 1991: 27). Foucault applied Bachelard’s epistemological thresholds to social sciences, so does Hacking who points out that “I would say that my own position is strikingly similar to Gaston Bachelard (1953) ‘applied rationalism and technical materialism’ “ (Hacking, 2002: 44).
Hacking’s “dynamic nominalism” is inspired by Foucault’s genealogical method of inquiry and Bachelard’s approach to rationalist materialism. In principle and in practice, it rejects a static and dogmatic approach to knowledge on the one hand, and it relies on the power of discourse and language as the essential component of knowledge production, making up people and the natural world. Hackings’ theory of “dynamic nominalism” is most valid – credible approach of nominalism.
For understanding “dynamic nominalism”, which operates on the three principle axes of “historical ontology of ourselves” (Foucault, 2004: 110), “First, a historical ontology of ourselves in relation to truth through which we constitute ourselves as subjects of knowledge; second, as historical ontology of ourselves in relation to a field of power through which we constitute ourselves as subject acting on others; third, a historical ontology in relation to ethnics through which we constitute ourselves as moral agents”. Historical ontology is basic foundation of “dynamic nominalism”, it is fully developed social-scientific theory.
2.1. Nominalism in Formal Knowledge System
Theories and practices of “naming” and “nominalization” are ingrained in the systems of knowledge, epistemology and ontology practices of making sense of the world of things and human societies, which are valid purposive, educational organizing, categorizing and classifying methods – approach. Its particularity and context dependency to the language, culture, society, time, space and place are constituent parts which need to be understood and studied for making sense of the society they make reference to, the body of knowledge for which they are constructed to express, the ‘world of things’ which they define, describe analysis, and explain.
Pure rational practices of “nominalism” are organizational, categorizing value-laden approach. It is purely for the purpose of understanding; howver, the worldview which constructs the names and their interpretations are subject of question and scrutiny. It is located within the system, which (Habermas, 1996) has been critical for being rigid, highly rational, highly formal that leaves no-space for informal everyday sphere of life to intervene in decision making process. Hacking, “historical ontology” (2002) provides an “objective”, valid meaningful, justifiable remedy to the gap between the formal and informal sphere of decision making process in “valid nominalism”.
The valid approach is concerned with making sense of the world of things and human societies, as a rational method of categorizing, classifying, making the world knowable and understandable in which “names”, and “naming” are for the purpose of recognition and ordering things and human societies (Foucault, 1970), value laden knowledge, system which is an organizational method. While societies are hierarchically organized into class, religions…etc. such hierarchies are questionable and constantly get assessed and tested for efficiently, justice, quality, progress, development…etc.
Thus, while formal systemic rational theories and practices of nominalism are necessary purposive methods of organizing our knowledge of human societies and world of things. Their validity depends on the knowledge system, language, culture, universality and particularity of the relevant epistemology and ontology. They are principle knowledge base that have contributed to the construction of system of knowledge constructed for making sense of particular society and societies, and world of things, for which they are designed to express, to write, to analyze, to define, to explain…etc (Hacking 2002, 1999).
If the first validity test, which is basic epistemological ontology (Hacking 2002) test of rationality and validity successfully has been passed, a theory and a practice of nominalism must be ‘tested for possible violations of principles of justice’. Most theories and practices of nominalism fail the test of principle of justice, meaning-reality accuracy, which may lead to systemic malfunctions, injustice, corruption, ethno-religious discrimination, racism, Constitution Act, Schedule B. Charter (1982).
Second, while practical reason in everyday life is a rich source of knowledge production and knowledge constitution. It is mainly in the practical reason and its associated spheres of everyday life, which practices and approaches of nominalism generate logical fallacies caused by cultural prejudices of short-term personal non-rational interests. The possible incompetent method is trial and error methods that allow prejudicial unjust practices enter the formal rational system, which do lead to corrupting the system and hurting-harming principles and practices of justice, reducing production of economic activity, generating further segregation and polarizations, damaging boarder-macro solidarity and cohesion in social, political and economic life.
2.2. Nominalism in Practice / Practical Reason and Nominalism
As pointed out, the second approach in nominalism is located within the “practical reason” (Habermas, 1972), which is subjective value burdened, part of a system of practices of everyday life (Habermas, 1972), it is cultural, relative, related to time, space, ethnicity, religion…etc. Within this approach of “naming” and “nominalism”(Hacking, 2002), there is a valid workable approach, which is based and derives its validity from logical reasoning system of “pure objective reason” with consideration for practical matters of law, justice, inclusion, rights, freedoms…etc.
It does not suppress the human component and the possibilities of “ought and ought not based on principles of justice”, it distinguishes “good” from “bad”, “constructive” from “destructive”, “positive” from “negative”, the subjective unprejudiced cultural practices of choice makings in everyday life.
Within the “practical reason”, an invalid prejudicial subjective practice of “naming” and “nominalism” (Hacking, 2002), which makes exclusionary choices on the bases of personal preference, group, ethnic, and religious preference…etc. introduces harmful practices to the system of pure objective reason and practical substantive reason of everyday life which are fundamental to the sustaining of continued social, political, legal and economic system built on principles of “reason and justice” that have provided for “minimal cohesion” and relations between states, nations, cultures, ethno-religious groups in different part of this world, in different relevant times and at various spaces of action and interaction where dialogue and negotiations for the management and governance of the societies and natural world take place.
At the macro level, that “minimal cohesion” has held the system of nations, the international system, working together in continued negotiation and dialogue mainly in close cooperation with the valid system of pure reason and valid practical reason that have made sense of relations of working, relations of shared understandings, and shared interest possible. The valid systems of pure and practical reason in formal and everyday life are the superior technical competencies which human beings possess, they are the human capacity to master, to govern and to mange their own affairs justifiably, ethically, universally, in order to regulate and to end invalid prejudicial, unreasonable, unjust exclusionary cultural approaches within the system and within practical reason of everyday life.
The superiority and admissibility of the universal epistemological ontology system of production, governance, practices of knowledge in the formal-systemic and in informal-practical spheres are fundamental for sustaining and increasing understanding and practicing justice in systems of “naming” and “nominalism” which make the micro component of the system intelligible, just, fair inclusive, democratic, pluralistic. While, practical complications in trial and error methods, have been useful for the advancement of the system of justice; as pointed out in practical sphere unsolvable, nonnegotiable complications that are not supported in the system, have been the main reasons for emergence of conflict, war, social, political and economic divisions within certain societies and internationally between nation-states.
The invalid component has been influenced – has been dominated by prejudices of non-rational cultural, non-standard choices of preference which accepts “certain names” and devalues “rejects certain names” without any correlation between the names and properties of the names, without evidence and reference to the meaning of the names in abstract and their characteristics in practice. Thus, choice makings on grounds of names and nominalism do violate universal principles of justice, if we apply “principles of justice” and “economic rationalism”, they do not have any logical correlations to social, to political, to economic well-being and for advancement of the person who has made the choice, nor for the person who has been chosen for his or her name, neither do contribute to the society. In fact, in certain cases, prejudicial choice makings about “accepting certain names” or “rejecting certain names” do harm the person who made the choice and the society for which the choice has been made.
Thus, the development and accumulation of valid knowledge about just practicable universal and particulars in “nominal world of things and human societies” must be built on principles of justice and fairness. Prejudicial judgements and decision on grounds of “names and nominal” are similar to racism, ethnocentrism, sexism…etc.., which must be regulated and governed by conscious legal enforcements and prohibitions, prescribed in Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
3. Social, Political and Economic Consequences of Invalid Nominalist Fallacies
The social, political and economic consequences of invalid nominalist fallacies do create systemic inefficacies and malfunctions, which lead to the reduction of economic production, unhealthy social system in the formal and informal spheres, leads to undemocratic, irresponsible, unrepresentative political system of governance and management. Social, political and economic consequences of invalid nominalist fallacies are similar to the consequences of racism, ethnocentrism, sexism…etc.
It is very important to ask and to answer two main categories of relevant questions in most accurate manner. The first category is questioning and analyzing “names” and nominalism. Where, why, how, when, what is a name? The second category is what, where, when, how, why is “work” and “occupation” necessary? While we recognize the world around us through naming and names, certain names do make reference to certain ethnicities, religions, regions, qualities, characteristics and attributes; nonetheless, names do not make reference and do not respond to their meanings in practice in all cases. Thus, names do make false reference in certain instances.
The second categories of questions are the queries which aid us to understand the ways in which ‘work’ is fundamental the successful fulfillment of human life for purpose of monetary and financial gains, for the purpose of creativity. It is through ‘work’ and our professions individual and human societies define, communicate, express themselves and earn means their livelihood. Without the right and ability to work, human species lose their definition as intelligent, creative, rational beings.
Hence, since we – human beings – define ourselves through our work and profession, depriving human beings of practicing their profession, discriminating against them and excluding them from the right to work on ground of their name, is a decision, which is in violation of basic principles which us defines human beings, in violation of the legal rights and freedoms which are guaranteed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and in violation of other relevant laws and legal codes which prohibit unjust, irrational discrimination of individuals and groups to live freely in accordance with the principles of rights and, responsibilities set out in the Constitution, the Charter, Bill of Rights and ethics of code conduct.
3.1. Social Consequences
Social consequences of invalid nominalism create unjust segregation, false labeling, social out-casting stigmatization, illegal discrimination, racism, damage to social cohesion and distortion to social solidarity at macro level and micro levels which constitute patriotism, sense of belonging, sense of community and cultural cohesion. Social agoninzation of certain names, which belong to certain ethno-religious cultures are practices of out-casting and exclusion that ultimately lead to withdrawal of the person(s) and their isolation from public life. In this subsection, I provide my own personal experience with the ways in which prejudices, unfair discriminatory and unjust practices against my name have contributed to my exclusion from social, political and economic life in Canada – as a Canadian citizen, I have lived in Canada for almost 22 years.
The question which asks “what is your name?” is expressed in a number of tones with a number of indented meanings, in a number of contexts. I am sure it rings in the ear of everyone who may recall a number of occasions and contexts in the past in which he or she has been asked “what is your name?” If the question is asked from a person or an entity of position of power, whether an employer, a government officer, a transportation agency, a new neighbour, a new co-worker, asked you in your own home city, your region, your own country of citizenship, from a person or an entity of the same ethno-religious culture, from an interviewer who you think will hire you to work…etc., do make a difference, each situation and condition which gives rise to the question is context dependent and situation specific.
A response to the question “what is your name?” may trigger the following reaction. My name is “Abdulkarim” . Response to the answer, oh, you have longest name which does not fit in our company form or University form. Where are you from? Are you an Arab? No, I am not an Arab; I am Kurdish. After explanations, the questioner: May I call you Abdul? No, because Abdulkarim is composed of a suffix and the actual name, the suffix is “Abdul” and the actual name is “Karim”, you may not call me by the suffix of my name, you may call me by the name, which is “Karim”.
What about your last name? My last name is a two name, last name? Questioner: in Canada the last name is only one name, you may have one of the two as middle name. On my landed documents, my full first and last names have been recorded as follows, which I have pointed out to you. Questioner: you can change and write your name any way you want. No, I want to keep my name as it is. Thereafter problems begun, not only in everyday life, in formal system of administration, and record keeping, the system has been biased and prejudicial.
As the result that I wanted to keep my name the way as it is, and I did, my name was twisted around, interchangeably, my first name used as middle name, a portion of my last name as my first name, middle name as last name, commonly known name as my formal name…etc. The same arduous journey continued, when I rented a shared accommodation in August 1990, one bedroom in a two bedroom apartment. An elderly senior citizen man, who was willingly decidedly that he, could not call me by my full first name; instead he choice to he called me by my father’s name “Hasan”, at times he called me “Karim”, or the last part of my last name, “Abdullah”. On my high school diploma from Toronto, Ontario, my name has been changed around; last part of my last name as first name of my “two name last name”…etc.
On a number of occasions when immigration officials called to check on my progress, he at his own discretion replaced and misplaced my first with my last names, and interpreted my respectful attitude and behavior that I did not want to learn and hear from him the slung English words, like “f. words”, or using I expression like “crazy”, “through you off the balcony up side down”…etc., he told me often, which did not have positive impact on my integration in Canadian culture. After 2.5 year exploiting me enough as new immigrants do often get exploited, he thought that I was not “respecting his furniture enough”, he asked me to vacate his bedroom apartment in spring 1993.
I am not sure what happened, I am not sure what he did, ever since I left his one bedroom apt., in spring 1993, I have not been able to rest in Canada. While I was making solid quality progressive in learning English, Canadian culture, getting through education at high school and college level: 1990 – 1994. The burden of my name and cultural prejudices certain people and offices associated with it in Canada, has been burdening, distorting, delaying proper assessment of my skills, expertise, characteristics for proper placement, which has been continuously disturbing me, my education, and my career. For certain, many others do have similar difficult experiences, which have been imposed on them due their name…etc., legal remedies must be provided.
Ultimately, I ended up with having commonly known name “Karim Hasan”, “Karim” as first name, and “Hasan” as last name, which people in university and workplace knew me by, my formal legal first and last names which the majority of my peers did not know, even a number of administrative government offices kept mistaken records of my legal name. Social Insurance kept “Abdullah”, after a couple of weeks of my arrival in August 1990; immigration officials did make that mistake, as my last name. Toronto Citizenship office did the same. Both of the mistakes by Ministry of Public Works and Human Resources and Immigration and Citizenship do warrant action for damages. Passport office, OHIP and Ministry of Transportation kept “Hasan Abdullah” as my last name, which is my original real last name.
In similar way, those companies, universities…etc. who were fine and accepting my full first name “Abdulkarim”, they kept “Abdulkarim” on record, those who thought for whatever reason they could not accept “Abdulkarim”, they either wrote my first name as “Karim”, or “Abdul”, recently the Ontario works write my first name as “Abdul (space) Karim”. I have asked many people whom I know that they arrived in Canada legally around the same time I did, they have experienced the same problems with name distortions and record distortion, which have been having unbearable negative consequences for their social-networking, for the purpose of settlement, finding employment, socialization, contribution to the society and communities in which they reside.
Name distortion, giving technical reasons, i.e. “not enough space is available” for distorting names, is prejudicial decisions on ground of names are techniques and means of distortion. As a scholar termed it, it is a technique to kill a person socially, political and economically, not physically ending the life of the person, but distorting his or her identity, cutting him or her to pieces of certain parts, regulating him or her, limiting him or her, localizing him or her…etc. a process which slowly and gradually end the social, political and economic present of a person in life and in the world.
As the consequence of false nominalist prejudices, certain people were not prepared to accept my full legal name “Abdulkarim”, an Arabic, which has a good meaning, “Abdul” means “servant”, “Karim” means “generous”, which is one of the names of God of Islam, combined, “Abdulkarim” means “servant of God”, but they accepted “Karim”, which is the first name in which my Master of Arts Legal Studies/Political Science Thesis has been written. No proper guidance, no sincere help were available. People may assume that “Abdulkarim” is a name of a religious person; in fact, I do not practice any religion. I am a secular person, with respect for religion, and have been “secular” since my adolescence age. It is inconceivable for an educated rational person or entity to prejudge a person’s level of education, whether he or she is secular or religious on the basis of the person’s name…etc., a practice which is common among the prejudicial, common lay people and untrained nominalist officials.
3.2. Political Consequence
Political consequences of invalid nominalism leads to lack of democracy, lack of accountability, lack of the rule of law, exclusion from participation in governance and management in political office, exclusion from equal full participation and political rights as citizens. False nominalism in politics opens the way for corrupt favoritism and power of the few who are related in culture with known familiar favoring certain names as politicians, political party names, and political platform names whereas those names do not reflect quality and the meaning of names of choice in practice. Approximately, 2500 years ago, the Greek philosopher argued that “man is a political animal” (Aristotle, 1992). Depriving citizens from participation and contribution to politics on grounds of their name does undermine the very essence that makes us human, undermines democratic principles which our society is founded, undermines equality rights…etc.
The consequence of false nominalism on politics is enormous. Political democratic public sphere is the space where citizens and community members take an active participation in the will-formation of the community, the regions in which they live, and the nation. Now, in the period in which, globalization has become an inevitable process of bringing nations together, successful democratic, responsible representative politics depends on cohesively formulated international public space where politics and political action do take place, where political actors decide on the current affairs and future of the locals, regions, and states they represent.
Who are those political actors? What are the criteria – qualifications to participate in politics as ordinary citizens, as administrators, as representatives, as presidents, as prime ministers? Do the rights and responsibilities of being a political actor and having the qualification to participate in politics include “nominal practices” and “having certain names” or his or her name is being of certain genealogical nominal decent as prerequisite?
While the practical materiality of false cultural prejudices have required certain non-rational, non-objective, certain limitations, certain false discriminatory and exclusionary practices against “certain names and nominals”, which are considered “false practices in nominalism”; prejudicial and unjust discriminatory exclusions on grounds of a person’s and entities’ name may face legal prohibition and consequences for the decisions makers future, interest…etc. Rational, responsible, accountable political actors do act on principles of just methods of governance as prescribed and defined the Charter of Rights and Freedom and relevant laws, legal ethics.
Will a Martin, a Glen, a Darryl, a Don, a Peter, a Rose, Hunt…etc. do a better job in politics, representation, administration, and executive responsibility, than Middle Eastern, East European, Asian, Chinese names or vise versa? In a very plain and simple language, a person’s and an entity’s name is not criterion of success. Thus, those who make their decision on the basis of a person’s name, they make decisions on the grounds of false method and false approach in nominalism.
The consequences of practices of “false nominalism” are devastating, which do lead to false categorization, false classification, of certain names and individuals, initially it will receive objections and criticisms, which may be confronted with in formal way. If “false nominalism” is accepted and systematized, which to a degree has been, the real problem of false categorizations do begin to materialize and lent to the emergence of corrupt, inefficient, irresponsible, wasteful the social, political and economic life in the formal and everyday spheres of life.
Thus, if “false nominalism” becomes predominant method, the society in formal and informal sphere, the system of governance and management will operate on false standards, false premises; thereby, unfairness, injustice, draconian measures against certain names emerge, rights and freedoms will vanish. For those who have read Nineteen Eighty Four novel by George Orwell, and for those who have lived under undemocratic regimes – dictatorial regimes do really understand the consequences of false nominalization, false stigmatizations, false prohibitions, false categorizations, false classifications…etc.
3.4. Economic Consequences
Economic consequences of invalid nominalism leads to appointing incapable, less experienced, less educated, less skilled expertise and work force, whom will reduce production, negatively influence quality of production, consume more than they produce…etc. For example, if a preferred name receives acceptance and gets hired for a position because of his or her name, or because he is she has a familiar a name, which is of certain ethno-religious cultural background acceptable to the hiring company, institution, organization, but the person is not skilled enough for, experienced enough for, educated enough for the position, needs more training for the position; the hiring practice will waste companies’ resources and it will be unfair for those jobseekers who are well skilled and experienced.
A person – a candidate with more higher qualification, more skills, more experience, more education than the candidate for hiring receives a rejection response because of his or her ethno-religious name related to a specific cultural genealogy regardless of the fact that the person’s charter, work skills, world view, practices have any correlations with the historical, cultural and ethno-religious identity in which his or her name has emerged and identity belonging to, and the meaning of the name does not always make reference to the character and quality of the person.
For example, if we were to list following names, John, Smith, Michael, Chris, Merry, Jerry, Ann…etc., in the list of candidates with names Karim, Abdulkarim, Dung, Brandski…etc., applying for lectureship position, for management position, for political public office…etc. who is most likely to receive first consideration and ultimately get hired, although Abdulkarim, Dung, Brandski do have more education skilled for the jobs they have applied? Second, who among those candidates are more likely to receive maximum wage and benefits offered for the job? While none of the candidates in the second group do practice and associate with the ethno-religious culture which their name is related to, they get assessed, prejudged and ultimately screened in or out on the grounds of their name.
With certain possible exceptions, in Canadian case and context, name discrimination is unjust practices, according to University of British Columbia field research, (2009, Oreopoulos), the most
advanced category of names, “English named applicants with Canadian Education and experience were more than three times high compared to resumes with Chinese, Indian…etc. names with foreign educations experience (5 percent versus 16 percent), but were no different compared to foreign applicants from Britain…etc. Canadian applicants that differed only by name had substantially different callback rates. Those with English sounding names received interview requests 40 percent more often than applicants with Chinese, Indian…etc. names (16 percent versus 11 percent). Overall, the results suggest considerable employer discrimination against applicant with ethnic names or with experience from foreign firms” (2009, Oreopoulos).
Rather than letting rational market economy analysis and worker skills competency decided on the success or failure of candidate, nominal and nominalism have been a decisive factor in the success or failure of the applicants. It is true that while recent trends in management have focused on cultural cohesion components and similarity of interest as important criterion to make the workers in specific companies happier more socialized culturally for the purpose of higher production, more cohesive workforce and healthier workforce; it is in informal everyday sphere of life where prejudices, discrimination, uncalculated groupings and categorization emerge, care is required in introducing extra-circular activities to company activities.
Market is rational which operates on principles (work force + means of production + product + demand = profit and surplus). Introducing locality and specific culture of ethno-religious groups to company’s code of conduct and cultural association do negatively effect the universality, international scope and scale of the target market, which particular companies intend to achieve, thereby reduces companies’ power and their products to locality, singularity, isolation, which may further draw them to specific unwritten and non-rational code of conduct very modern rational terms.
While we are all in need of socio-cultural associations, which are practices that may lead to cohesion and sense of belonging, the rational component – base may not be subjected to prejudicial decisions on grounds of a person or an entity’s name. In the interest of the companies and justice, competency, capacity, skill, experience, contribution, and character must be considered as the main criterion in decisions making about the person’s and entities’ success or failure. In the interest of justice and “rational economy” prejudices and discriminations on grounds of a person, an entities’ name and nominalist decisions must be regulated and prohibited by providing legal remedies to invalid nominalism. The Charter of Rights and Freedom, Constitution Act of Canada, and Bill of Rights do have provisions which may admit such prohibition.
4. Legal Remedies to Invalid Nominalist Fallacies
A constitutional prohibition of discrimination on grounds of a person’s name must included in Charter of Rights and Freedoms, SS. 7, 15, 11, prohibiting restriction and discrimination of an a person’s (citizen) social, political, economic, legal rights and freedoms on grounds of a person’s – individual’s name, whether the name is English, French, of European, Asian, ethno, or religious decent, or of any ethnic connotations; discrimination on grounds of name must be illegal.
Thus, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms has to be amended for inclusion of a new prohibition, and of equality rights, in section 7, and 11,legal rights, section 15, must to prohibit discrimination on grounds of a person’s, entities’ “name”, and to guarantee equal rights and equality of rights to all Canadian, that no-Canadian would be discriminated on grounds of having ethnic names, or names which have religious connotation in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice prescribed and guaranteed in the charter.
Second, economic rationalist, remedy relies on specific expertise, skills, capacity and competencies of the individual and the entity to perform certain duties successfully in job market. Names and nominals are categories of cultural, historical…etc., they are not decisive factors of competency and skill, names and nominals are not indicators of success or failure of employees, workers in their profession. Decisive measurements and indicators are skills, expertise, competencies of the workers in their profession to maximize surplus and profit in legal, justifiable manner.
5. Conclusion
In abstract principle, the “good names” and “bad names” are all meaningless neither can be intelligible in accordance with their properties and characteristics. It is their cultural, historical, experiential, memory texts and contexts that create meanings of “good”, “bad” “likeable” or “unlikable” “familiar names”, or “unfamiliar names”, “legal” or “illegal names”. Thus, culture, history, experience and memory must be tested for validity. Hence, we must be careful with prejudicial practices, exclusionary measures which particular cultures, histories, experiences and memories do impose; they must be assessed and screened in accordance with principles of justice and fairness prescribed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadian Bill of Rights, work ethics, and boarder moral principles.
Let us make promise and practice that we do not prejudge on the grounds of a person’s and an entity’s name. Let us practice principles of justice as prescribes in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Canadian Bill of Rights in the formal and informal spheres of life. Let us work to correct the injustices which certain offices, officials, individuals, entities practice. Research results as shown in the University of British Columbia (2009, Oreopoulos) and other sources, I have quoted and my own experience which I recounted and wrote in this paper, have provided sufficient evidence about discrimination, unjust exclusionary measures against certain names and nominals. We must work to realize just society in practice and application.
_________________________
End Note:
In paragraph three and onwards, I have described and explained my own experience when I first landed in Canada legally. In immigration reception house when immigration officials were preparing my social insurance card, OHIP, and other residency documentations in 1990, in Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
_____________
References
Aristotle (1994) The Politics, Penguin Books, New York.
Foucault Michel (1970) The Order of Things: An Archaeology of Human Sciences, Pantheon Books, New York.
Foucault, Michel (1983) “On the Genealogy of Ethnics, An Interview of Works in Progress” in Hubert
Dreyfus and Paul Rabinow, Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics; with an Afterword by and Interview with Michel Foucault, pp. 229 – 253, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Foucault, Michel (1994) “What is Enlightenment” Paul Rabinow (eds.), Ethics, Subjectivity and Truth: Essential Works of Foucault, 1954 – 1984 volume 1, The New Press: New York.
Government of Canada, “Canadian Bill of Rights” Department of Justice Canada, (accessed, 23, 02, 2012: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-12.3/page-1.html)
Government of Canada, “The Constitution Act 1982, Schedule B. Charter of Rights and Freedoms”, pp. 128-144, Patrick Fitzgerald, Looking as Law: Canada’s Legal System, Fourth Edition, Bybooks, Ottawa.
Also see:
(i) Canadian Legal Information Institute: “The Constitution Act 1982,…etc” (accessed, 23, 02, 2012: http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/const/const1982.html),
(ii) Department of Justice Canada: “Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms: Part I of the
Constitution Act, 1982” (accessed, 23, 02, 2012: http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/charter/)
Grosselin, Mia (1990) Nominalism and Contemporary Nominalism: Ontological and Epistemological Implications of the Work of W.V.O. Quine and of N. Goodman, Kuwler Academic Publishers, Dordrecht
Hacking, Ian (1997) “Making up People” Thomas C. Heller et al. (eds.), Reconstructing Individualism: Autonomy, Individuality, and the Self in Western Thought, pp. 222-236, Stanford University Press, California.
Hacking, Ian (1999) The Social Construction of What? Harvard University Press, Cambridge Massachusetts.
Hacking, Ian (2002) Historical Ontology, Harvard University Press, Cambridge Massachusetts.
Habermas, Jurgen (1972) Knowledge and Human Interest, trans. Jeremy J. Shapiro, Heinemann, London.
Habermas, Jurgen (1996) Between Facts and Norms: Contribution to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, trans. William Rehg, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Habermas, Jurgen (1999) Exclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory, Ciaran Cronin and Palbo De Greiff (ed.) MIT Press, Cambridge Massachusetts.
H.A.Hasan, Karim .A. (2005) “Hacking, Foucault: Making up People and Nominalism”?, Doctoral Research Essay, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario. ( I wrote this research essay in 2005).
Kant, Immanuel (1956) Critique of Practical Reason, trans. Lewiz White Beck, Hobbs Merrill Press, Indianapolis.
Kant, Immanuel (1987), Critiques of Judgement, trans. Werner S. Pluhar, Hobbs Merril Press, Indianapolis.
Oreopoulos, Philip (2009), “Why Do Skilled Immigrants Struggle in the Labor Market? A Field Experiment with Thousand Resumes”, University of British Columbia, National Bureau of Economic Research, Canadian Instituted for Advanced Studies.
Orwell, George, (1987) Nineteen Eighty Four: 1984, Penguin Books, London.
0.000000
0.000000
