Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Personal identity and social identity
Personal identity and social identity
Personal identity and social identity
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Personal identity and social identity
In this paper I offer an explication of John Perry’s dialogue on the problem of personal identity, and my evaluation of the strongest account of personal identity between the body, mind, and soul. In this paper I will argue that the strongest account of personal identity is that a person can be identified by their soul. By having the sameness of soul you will then be able to solve the problem of personal identity. Your soul is the foundation of whom you are and by definition, personal identity means “The persistent and continuous unity of the individual person normally attested by continuity of memory with present consciousness.” And without your soul memory could not exist.
Why is personal identity a problem? This seems to be the question of life or death. Your personal identity
…show more content…
A problem with personal identity revolves around if you are the same person today, which you were last week? Do we always remain the same? I read a short story about Muhammad Ali and how he changed his religion and name. Muhammad Ali went from the legendary “ float like a butterfly, sting like a bee” champion, to an old man struggling with Parkinson’s disease. There is the generic “ you have changed” saying many of us may get depicting us as someone different, but are we really someone different? In the dialogue, the main characters discuss several accounts of personal identity and analyze the issue on personal identity.
In the dialogue, the two main characters, Miller and Weirob, engage in a discussion on the problem of personal identity. I believe the strongest account of personal identity is same soul, same person. In the first night, Miller’s premise is sameness of soul, not
In John Perry’s “dialogue on personal identity and immorality”, Dave Cohen and Sam Miller visit Gretchen Weirob in the hospital because of Weirob’s injury in a motorcycle accident, they raise a discussion on personal identity. Cohen later takes up issues raised in the case where Julia’s brain is taken from her deteriorated body and placed on the healthy body of Mary whose brain has been destroyed. Therefore Mary has her own body with Julia’s memory and personality. The case proposes an argument
Although the concept of identity is recurrent in our daily lives, it has interpreted in various ways.
In the following essay, I will develop my thoughts by talking about how Weirob challenges her long life friend Miller to comfort her on her death bed for three nights, about the slight possibility of her soul surviving after death. This is based on the author John Perrys’ ideas. I will also be discussing the two personal criterions that we discussed in class that I believe fit best to the passage.
To answer the question of whether a person can persist through time, it is important to consider what is meant by a ‘person’. This consideration seems trivial at first, and if one were to take the physicalist route, it would be – a person persists through time by existing as the same human animal. However, it is in fact a lot harder to pinpoint what the ‘self’ actually consists of if we were to take the psychological route and consider the voice inside our heads, the voice that thinks and experiences and suffers. What is this mysterious immaterial phenomenon that we hold to be our personal identity? And what makes it the same entity as the one yesterday? Although these questions don’t have an explicit answer yet, in this essay I will attempt to give an insight on how they could be answered, offering a psychological
In his 1971 paper “Personal Identity”, Derek Parfit posits that it is possible and indeed desirable to free important questions from presuppositions about personal identity without losing all that matter. In working out how to do so, Parfit comes to the conclusion that “the question of identity has no importance” (Parfit, 1971, p. 4.2:3). In this essay, I will attempt to show that Parfit’s thesis is a valid one, with positive implications for human behaviour. The first section of the essay will examine the thesis in further detail, and the second will assess how Parfit’s claims fare in the face of criticism. Problems of personal identity generally involve questions about what makes one the person one is and what it takes for the same person to exist at separate times (Olson, 2010).
Consciousness is seemingly always during the present and memory, a past entity. However, Locke responds to Reid and claims that one can have a memory of something without having consciousness of that memory. Reid continues to argue that identity must be something that stays exactly the same over time, however, our consciousness is in a state of constant fluctuation, thus our personal identity would be endlessly changing. Locke counters Reid, however, arguing that our consciousness is constantly changing and that we could still be very much conscious when we are sleeping. Furthermore, our personal identity is not restricted by our consciousness however, our capability to be conscious of former memories. Although Locke successfully responds to Reid’s first criticisms, Reid presents the analogy of the brave officer which highlights key contradictions that effectively subvert Locke’s account of personal
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
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.
and second nights, Weirob and her friends discuss personal identities’ relationship with soul, memory and
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:
Personal identity examines what makes a person at one time identical with a person at another. Many philosophers believe we are always changing and therefore, we cannot have a persisting identity if we are different from one moment to the next. However, many philosophers believe there is some important feature that determines a person’s identity and keeps it persistent. For John Locke, this important feature is memory, and I agree. Memory is the most important feature in determining a person’s identity as memory is the necessary and sufficient condition of personal identity.
Whereas, Hughes depicts a speaker that struggles with personal identity issues because he hasn’t developed a sense of self-perception and, as a result, lacks the capability to define himself as a person. The character of Dave in Wright’s story struggles with the concept of personal identity because he wants to alter the way others perceive him by going on a quest to prove his manliness and earn the right to be respected. However, Dave’s attempt to alter their perceptions of him ultimately destroys their impressions of him since he failed to own up to his actions like a real man would in order to gain the respect that he sought. The speaker of Hughes’ poem struggles with the concept of personal identity because he lacks the capability to define himself since he hasn’t had the opportunity to reflect and discover his inner self in order to gain a sense of self-perception. Most of the time personal identity issues occur in real life but they also take place in works of literature as well since these stories portray characters or speakers in different scenarios that struggle with the concept of personal identity. There are numerous reasons of how these two stories portray characters or speakers that struggle with the concept of personal identity but this is only one example of the ways they
There are two major religious beliefs on the soul, and though they may seem diametrically opposed, we must remember that our ideas on the soul exist only because of the conditioned acceptance of these religiou...
John Locke, one of the most influential philosophers of all time, believed that the key to personal identity was within one’s consciousness. In Carly Pace’s discussion forum for John Locke she goes on to say that, “Locke defines consciousness as the force by which personal identity is established.” What John Locke means by consciousness is that it is a person’s mind and soul, essentially their entire personal and spiritual identity. John Locke goes as far to say that without a consciousness you aren’t even considered a real person. John Locke’s entire philosophical debate on the state of consciousness is to determine what it actually takes to truly distinguish a normal human being from a unique person.
In a time where science and materialism reign, the topic of the soul is rarely mentioned, ostensibly left in the past with the philosophers of old. Nichols, however, candidly broaches this difficult topic and gives new life to the argument that humans do indeed have an immaterial, immortal soul. Nichols summarizes several popular arguments for the existence of the soul as he builds his own argument, which discusses a soul as limited in relation to its environment as well as a soul that is one with the mind and a controller of the body. He discusses both the strengths and challenges to his argument, offering rebuttals to the challenges. Because this soul is the organizing principle of the body it is involved in the Resurrection as well, bridging the gap between the material and spiritual worlds. However, I disagree with Nichols’ assessment, instead choosing the side of materialism where an immaterial soul does not exist.