J.D. Haltigan, PhD, a developmental psychologist, recently sparked online discussion with a tweet criticizing what he termed "radical leftist progressivists" for their stance on societal categories and essentialism. In his post, Haltigan asserted that these groups "abhor 'categories' & 'essentialism' because—despite them being reliably predictable with high accuracy—they constrain full 'liberation' to live whatever social deviance they please." He concluded by stating, "Categories structure & stabilize a society—which is the point."
Dr. Haltigan's public commentary aligns with his background as a vocal critic of certain ideological trends within academia. He has previously been involved in a lawsuit against the University of California, Santa Cruz, challenging a requirement for faculty applicants to submit diversity statements, viewing such mandates as infringements on free speech and academic freedom. His work often explores the intersection of psychology and societal norms.
Essentialism, a philosophical concept with roots in Plato and Aristotle, posits that objects and entities possess inherent, necessary attributes that define their identity. This view suggests that certain properties are fundamental to what something is, and without them, it would not be that kind of thing. Historically, essentialist thinking has provided a framework for understanding and categorizing the natural and social world.
Conversely, progressive thought often critiques essentialism, particularly in the context of social identities. Many progressive viewpoints argue that categories like gender, race, and sexuality are largely social constructs rather than fixed, inherent essences. This perspective emphasizes fluidity and individual self-definition, often advocating for the dismantling of traditional categories to promote greater inclusivity and liberation from perceived oppressive structures.
The tension highlighted by Haltigan's tweet underscores a significant ideological divide in contemporary discourse. He contends that the rejection of established categories by progressives undermines the very structures that provide societal stability and predictability. From this perspective, the push for "full liberation" from such constraints is seen as potentially leading to "social deviance" and disorder.
This debate extends to various facets of society, including education, law, and public policy, where discussions about identity, individual rights, and collective norms frequently arise. While Haltigan emphasizes the stabilizing role of categories, progressive advocates typically argue that challenging rigid classifications is essential for social justice and the recognition of diverse lived experiences. The ongoing dialogue reflects fundamental differences in how societal order and individual freedom are conceptualized.