Sameness of person consists not in sameness of soul nor the sameness of body, but in sameness of consciousness. According to the memory view, the personal identity is established by (genuine) memory-relations. Locke’s theory manifests the idea that rather than being tied to our physical bodies, our identity is bound to our consciousness. Locke, in one of his works states that consciousness is the perception of what passes in a man’s own mind. Essentially, meaning that consciousness equals memories. Unlike, the conventional theories; bodily and soul view, Locke’s views that memory relations constitute “a person is a sequence of person-stages linked by (genuine) memory.” As personal identity is not bound by a constant component of a person to be present over a whole lifetime, neither body nor a soul. …show more content…
For instance, a rope is composed of twisted fibres, but no fibre needs to run the whole length of the rope.
Using this analogy, the person is the “rope” and the “fibres” are the memory connections, and the mental processes they connect. However, as long as the personal is psychological connected, in other words, if the person can remember their childhood memories, then they are the same person. Philosophers reasons the attractiveness of this theory, as unlike bodily and soul views, the identity of the self is not the identity of the body or soul. Therefore, a person would know who they are without examining their body and in case of someone waking up in a different body, they would not conclude they were not the same person. Furthermore, memory view reflects the importance of personal identity, as psychology is more important, both to ourselves and to others, than our bodily
characteristics. However, there is a circularity objection to the memory view. Which derives from the issue of distinguishing between genuine memory and merely apparent memory. Apparent memory, is for instance when a person might only seem to remember an experience because a hypnotist made them believe it, or from reading a vivid description of it in someone’s diary. Therefore, the notation that “a person = a sequence of person-stages linked by memory” is wrong, unless it means genuine memory. This is wrong as if a hypnotist gave the person a merely apparent memory, it might be fictitious. Therefore, to admit that false memories is a criterion of personal identity would make the theory insupportable. As it is saying that, the person is identical with the person who was present at the fictitious event. Therefore, person-stages are connected suitably to count as stages of a single person when they are connected by (genuine) memory links. So in order to explain personal identity, one must define genuine memory. Genuine memory = apparent memory provided that the person with apparent memory really had the experience, hence the person with the apparent memory is identical to the person who really had the experience. However, that means that Locke’s theory is circular, he defines personal identity over times in terms of genuine memory, but genuine memory presupposes personal identity. A circularity issue occurs when what you trying to prove is presupposed by what you are using to prove it. So in this case, a memory is genuine is to say that the person who experienced the event is the same person remembering it. However, this would not work as the method of identifying if the person is the same person is through using memory as a criterion. Therefore, this is a circularity issue. Therefore, the memory view theory of a person as a set of person-stages linked by genuine memory would not provide the basis for an explanation of what a person is. As it would only lead to a circular explanation. Circularity is a problem as it leads to answer to the relevant question, which are useless, because they give you answers, where by interpreting it merely brings you back to a repetition of the original question. Which in forth, makes it an unusable tautology. A possible reply to Circularity objection is that the definition that Genuine memory = apparent memory + personal identity is inaccurate. As an apparent memory of something, you really did would not automatically be a genuine memory. For example, when might feel like you remember when you were 22 months old, as your parents continuously told you about it. However, in reality you do not have the memory of when you were 22 months. Although the apparent memory matches reality, it was caused in the wrong way. In other words, the content of the memory might be true, and yet the memory might not be genuine. Therefore, we should define genuine memory = apparent memory which is caused in the right way. In which philosophers describe this as quasi memory. Hence, this definition is not circular as it doesn’t invoke or utilise personal identity in order to define personal identity. Hence, the notion of memory is replaced with that of “quasi memory,” constituting the theory “a person is a sequence of person-stages linked by quasi memory.
John Locke is a philosopher who wrote one of the first responses to the question of personal identity. Locke writes that you cannot say if something is the same or different unless you define what kind of identity you are looking at, he calls this relativity of identity. He then mentions that there are three different criterion for identity: bodily, human being, and personhood. Bodily states that if any matter has changed then it is no longer the same mass, human being states that the identity of a man stays the same as long as it continues the same life and personhood states that if something has a consciousness then it remains the same as longer as it consider itself itself. Now, when his view on identity is applied to Theseus’ ship one can see that he would believe that the ship at the destination would not be the same ship because it is only a body of matter and has no consciousness. One verify this by looking at one of his essays; he is talking about identity concerning animals and he states “there may be a manifest change of the parts; so that truly they are not either of them the same masses of matter, they be truly one of them the same oak and the other the same horse.”2 In this passage it shows that Locke believes the body of the living thing has changed and that they are classified as the same living thing is because of the life they
John Locke is considered one of the best political minds of his time. The modern conception of western democracy and government can be attributed to his writing the Second Treatise of Government. John Locke championed many political notions that both liberals and conservatives hold close to their ideologies. He argues that political power should not be concentrated to one specific branch, and that there should be multiple branches in government. In addition to, the need for the government to run by the majority of the population through choosing leaders, at a time where the popular thing was to be under the rule of a monarch. But despite all of his political idea, one thing was extremely evident in his writing. This was that he preferred limited
He argued that personal identity goes hand in hand with the consciousness of someone. So if you switched bodies, you would still view your new body as “yourself” because your mind and consciousness is with it. Thomas Reid attempted to falsify Locke’s proposition by creating the “Brave Young Officer” situation. This objection is a story about a military officer. When the 40-year old officer goes to steal food, he remembers himself stealing an apple from his neighbors as a 10-year old child. Then, at 80-years old, the now general remembers stealing food as a 40-year old officer, but not as a 10-year old child. Locke would say that the general is both the same and not the same as the child. This is because the officer shares continuity of consciousness with the child and the general, so both the general and the child must be related. But also according to Locke, if something doesn’t share a continuous stream of memory, then they are not related. So the general and the child can’t be the same person if they don’t share continuity of consciousness. Reid argues: how could you be the same but not the same? How can continuity of memory or consciousness dictate personal identity if we forget our memories? Joseph Butler declared that John Locke’s theory was circular because the notion of memory it employs presupposes the notion of personal identity. Both critics favor a substance-view of personal
John Locke's account of identity was a radical rethinking on the subject of personal identity. Moreover, his conception of personal identity shaped modern thought about the subject by placing the emphasis on a psychological criterion . Locke argued that there is a distinction between the human being, the person, and the soul, and that the identity of the person relies upon the continuation of the same consciousness. In other words, Locke believed that personal identity remains if the same consciousness remained. However, at the time of publication, Locke was heavily criticised by those who argued that his uses of the word 'consciousness' was too ambiguous. Some, such as Thomas Reid, interpreted Locke as equating consciousness with memory, and as a result of the fallible nature of memory, argued that Locke's account of personal identity failed .
Essay I agree with Document B… Locke, because he basically believes about the government begin by nature and everyone. He said “it teaches all mankind of being equal and independent”. “No one should harm another’s life, health, liberty or professions”. I also agree with having independence and freedom without harm. Naturally with freedom and have your own opinion. Well disagreeing with another basically telling your opinion of State of Nature. Not depending on one another but more of nature. Hobbes believes that everyone is selfish and just terrible but Locke believes of independence and believes we shouldn’t spoil anything God has created of this world also with Political powers. He speaks about opinions are okay and are spoken freely. Living
Personal identity, in the context of philosophy, does not attempt to address clichéd, qualitative questions of what makes us us. Instead, personal identity refers to numerical identity or sameness over time. For example, identical twins appear to be exactly alike, but their qualitative likeness in appearance does not make them the same person; each twin, instead, has one and only one identity – a numerical identity. As such, philosophers studying personal identity focus on questions of what has to persist for an individual to keep his or her numerical identity over time and of what the pronoun “I” refers to when an individual uses it. Over the years, theories of personal identity have been established to answer these very questions, but the
One of Locke’s statements that he discusses is that of an individual’s own person. Example, when an individual takes away something from nature through his/her hard work, it will not be considered as “common property” of all mankind no more, because it would belong ONLY to himself. For instance, If an individual picks up (fruits) under a tree, the so called fruit will automatically belong to him at the moment they were gathered, rather than at the
David Hume was a Scottish philosopher who lived in the 18th century. Hume marked a turning point in philosophy with his now almost infamous skepticism. And while he claimed to be a mild skeptic, the ramifications of his claims were felt by all subsequent philosophers. His critique was impactful for the sheer variety of subjects Hume seemingly uprooted. One such subject that Hume assaulted with his arguments was the idea of personal identity. Hume is in the middle of a philosophic dialogue were people reason metaphysical claims from arguments predicated upon the existence of the self. He does this to put an end to arguments that justify the soul and from that further claim erroneous notions such as god and substance before they can be made. Hume would compare our sense of self to a daily illusion we experience. Hume does posit how these illusions come about. Hume claims that
Locke viewed the identity of physical objects based on “perfect continued existence of the material body” (Emerson, 1997: 1). An object will remain the same object if it has all the same physical components. The arrangement of the physical particles is irrelevant. Locke used the example of simple and compound substances, involving atoms (Wanderer, 2005: 59). However, a simpler example would be a book on a shelf. If the book remained untouched in perpetuity, then the identity of the book would remain unchanged. But if pages were torn out of the book, Locke’s view would be that it is not the same book anymore – there ceases to be a perfect continued existence of material body (Emerson, 1997:1)
The personal identity continues to be same since a person is the same rational thing, same self, and thus the personal identity never changes (Strawson, 2014). Locke also suggests that personal identity has to change when the own self-changes and therefore even a little change in the personal identity has to change the self. He also provides an argument that a person cannot question what makes something today to remain the same thing it was a day ago or yesterday because one must specify the kind of thing it was. This is because something might be a piece of plastic but be a sharp utensil and thus suggest that the continuity of consciousness is required for something to remain the same yesterday and today. John Locke also suggests that two different things of a similar type cannot be at the same time at the same place. Therefore, the criteria of the personal identity theory of Locke depends on memory or consciousness remaining the same (Strawson, 2014). This is because provided a person has memory continuity and can remember being the same individual, feeling, thinking, and doing specific things, the individual can remain to be the same person irrespective of bodily
Accordingly, all that is needed for an individual to possess and maintain his personal identity are certain mental capacitates for having conscious experiences, the examples of thoughts and sensation are given, and the ability to perform intentional actions. It this portion of the theory, a departure from the traditional Aristotelian view of substances is made. The original viewpoint of Aristotelian forms can apply only to inanimate objects, which have no personal identity, in this dualist theory, if the arguments illustrating that two people can be the same person, even if the is no continuity between the physical matter of each body are correct. Consequently, for two substances to be considered the same, in this reformed view, they
What is personal identity? This question has been asked and debated by philosophers for centuries. The problem of personal identity is determining what conditions and qualities are necessary and sufficient for a person to exist as the same being at one time as another. Some think personal identity is physical, taking a materialistic perspective believing that bodily continuity or physicality is what makes a person a person with the view that even mental things are caused by some kind of physical occurrence. Others take a more idealist approach with the belief that mental continuity is the sole factor in establishing personal identity holding that physical things are just reflections of the mind. One more perspective on personal identity and the one I will attempt to explain and defend in this paper is that personal identity requires both physical and psychological continuity; my argument is as follows:
John Locke believes that A is identical with B, if and only if, A remembers the thoughts, feelings, and actions had or done by B from a first-person point of view. This shows that the important feature, memory, is linking a person from the beginning of their life to the end of their life. Locke’s memory theory would look something like this: The self changes over time, so it may seem like personal identity changes too. However, even if you are changing, you are still retaining past memories. Therefore, if you can retain memories, memories are the link between you and an earlier you, so personal identity persists over time. So, memory is the necessary and sufficient condition of personal
For this paper I am going to argue that in “A Dialogue on Personal Identity and Immortality” Gretchen Weirod was correct by claiming that personal identify cannot consist in the sameness of an immaterial, unobservable soul. My view is that one is who they are because of the brain/mind not their soul. (52)
Based on the "Right Theory" of John Locke, the 17th century British philosopher, He argued that "laws of nature mandate that we should not harm anyone's life, health , liberty or possessions." Food is considered as a possession by other person so if you steal, you can be a violator to "the laws of nature." Therefore, based on Locke's theory stealing can viewed as immoral or unethical. In addition, he said that every person has "the rights and duties" to each other. Meaning, you have the right to acquire possessions including the your basic needs such as food. And other people, on other hand have also a moral duty not to rob you.