Categorizing is necessary for humans, but it becomes pathological when the category is seen as definitive, preventing people from considering the fuzziness of boundaries, let alone revising their categories.

Categorizing is necessary for humans, but it becomes pathological when the category is seen as definitive, preventing people from considering the fuzziness of boundaries,

In short, nonstop categorization is every bit as indispensable to our survival in the world as is the nonstop beating of our hearts. Without the ceaseless pulsating heartbeat of our “categorization engine”, we would understand nothing around us, could not reason in any form whatever, could not communicate with anyone else, and would have no basis on which to take any action.

I'm not a fan of classification. It is very difficult to come up with a classification scheme that's useful when what you're most interested in is things that don't fit in, things that you didn't expect. But some people decided that every page should carry classification. They came up with a scheme, based on page names, to establish a classification structure for a wiki. And these people who care about classification maintain it.

Humans are fond of putting people into categories for all sorts of reasons, but oftentimes, especially when it comes to skin color and nationality, for creating hierarchies or pecking orders. As for my experiences of race and identity, that’s a very big question deserving of an essay-length response, hence my introductory chapter.

Classification is thought of by many librarians as either a fearful complication of a very simply act, or an outmoded, almost prehistoric, method of doing a very complex mathematical task.

I don't mind categories, but these publications are keeping me from being seen as I really am, which is a student of world literature and interested in many countries.

Classification is real, but it is based much more on a set of social definitions than on genetic distinctions. Legally defined categories for race differ from one country to another, and they change over time depending largely on the social and political realities of a particular society or nation. The notion of discrete racial categories arose mostly as an artifact of centuries-long immigration history coupled with overriding worldviews that white superiority was inherent, a purported genetic destiny that has no basis in modern science.

To be categorized is, simply, to be enslaved

People love to classify things as black and white, good or bad, but I’ve seldom met any one who can be neatly defined and classified…

Any serious attempt to define and to classify forms of consciousness will act as a "red flag" waved in the face of many critics. The effort to define accurately and to classify in any detail is bound, they will urge, to result in a conservative clinging to conclusions once reached and in a love of schedules and schemes for their own sake. The system maker, they will insist, is likely to subordinate the facts to his classification and to cut down the truth to the measure of his framework.

I have a problem with categorization problem because I cannot say this thing got to be in that module or that class.

That's the problem with categories. Once you're labeled, you have a hard time breaking out.

Without categorization, maps would not be possible.