The current and past discussion in philosophy about personal identity seems to have missed something along the way. This thing is the relation of the self we are looking to define to other things in the form of “ownership” or “possession”. By exploring these ideas, it may be possible to flesh out and rethink our previous theories in a more fruitful manner. This thesis is, certainly, a large claim to make. And I have no qualifications to make such a claim; there are few people who have such qualifications: I am not among them. However, I do not see why this should restrict me from making it. If thought is restricted to only what we know, then it is impossible to learn. Of course, there is the off chance the outsider may see further than those who live in a field, but that sits secondary to the opportunity for learning, in my opinion. That is why I am writing this essay. I want to share my claim, its arguments, and the research that informs it with whoever I can, if they have even a basic interest on the topic, so that both the reader and I can …show more content…
This contrasts with questions about ourselves that arise by virtue of our being living things, conscious beings, material objects, or the like.” For our simple purpose, this definition seems fittings. Then, when stating that ownership has some place in the discussion of personal identity, I must ensure it falls within this definition in some way. However, trying to work off a broad definition fails to pin down the parts of a discussion. So, again taking from SEP, there are a few core questions in the study of personal identity that should be enumerated through when talking through each theory and examining it. But, let us first talk about them outside of applying
Identity is the essential core of who we are as individuals, the conscious experience of the self-inside.
Although the concept of identity is recurrent in our daily lives, it has interpreted in various ways.
Identity is a group of characteristics, data or information that belongs exactly to one person or a group of people and that make it possible to establish differences between them. The consciousness that people have about themselves is part of their identity as well as what makes them unique. According to psychologists, identity is a consistent definition of one’s self as a unique individual, in terms of role, attitudes, beliefs and aspirations. Identity tries to define who people are, what they are, where they go or what they want to be or to do. Identity could depend on self-knowledge, self-esteem, or the ability of individuals to achieve their goals. Through self-analysis people can define who they are and who the people around them are. The most interesting point about identity is that some people know what they want and who they are, while it takes forever for others to figure out the factors mentioned before. Many of the individuals analyzed in this essay are confused about the different possible roles or positions they can adopt, and that’s exactly the reason they look for some professional help.
The question of personal identity is very intuitive, yet very difficult to define. Essentially, what makes you, you? John Locke was one philosopher who attempted to answer this question. He proposed a psychological theory to define personal identity. His theory does have some merit, but it is not a correct definition of personal identity, since there are some counter-examples that cannot be accounted for. My argument will prove that Locke’s theory of personal identity is false.
It is one sad existence, to live and die, without discovering, what could have been. The question is often asked, what is the meaning of life? Or even, what is the purpose? There is no clear answer, and yet there is a search in every moment, every breath, and every corner, for a minute hint. In a societal setting, identity is merely determined by the amount of tangible things owned. Society places the ideology on individuals that those who own the most tangible things are above others. An individual can trump all those societal values by owning the self. This brings equality to all, and levels the playing field. This has been true throughout history, however behind all of this, there are individuals learning to conquer themselves. It begs the question, what defines a person, the physical or the metaphysical? There is obviously a compelling relationship between ownership and the sense of self or identity. But, is it ownership that determines the sense of self or is it perhaps, that the sense of self determines ownership. The
Parfit aims to defend the following two claims about personal identity. 1. What is the difference between a. and a. Sometimes questions about personal identity have no clear answer; and 2. That we can still answer important questions about, for example, responsibility, memory and survival, even though we cannot answer questions of identity. Although he admits that some of these important questions do presuppose personal identity, Parfit believes that we can overcome this problem by prizing these questions apart from the notion of personal identity.
People who are called philosophers have sat around for centuries, discussing how ownership relates to identity. Philosophers have talked and made claims, but no one has ever been able to give an exact definition of ownership or identity, since there is not one. What philosophers have determined is a connection of character, which is moral, and the other has to do with detrimental effects. These two rational reasons show a positive and negative interaction, but that is not the point with which to relate ownership of identity. The point with which to relate ownership to identity is the aspect of building an individual sense and a group sense of belonging to something. Look at human beings, for example, peop...
Weirob is wright to claim that personal identity cannot consist in the sameness of an immaterial, unobservable soul. (In Perry’s dialogue on personal mortality)
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
“A human being’s sense of self is established in the context of their ethics and morals. The concept of identity is related to ‘who I am’. Individuals situate themselves in a contextual environment that may include their relationships with family and friends, and their abilities and the occupations in which they are, or have been. This identifies what is ultimately important to an individual and how that relates to where their identity is in relation to this.” (Thomas, 2013)
What comes to mind when some asks you, “What do you think ownership and identity mean? How are they related”? You like to think about a possession of some physical item, right? Let’s travel on the undesirable side of the deep-rooted topic. When I think of ownership and self/identity, I think of a talent or skill. Musicians work well with this side of the spectrum. Musicians, pianists, like me, who have had intense classical training and consider themselves to be greater than anyone they know, run into undesirable arrogance and pretentiousness. I’ve found myself in various confrontations with fellow musicians upset with me because “I think I’m better than them”. To be frank, I get the idea in my head that I’m gifted on an instrument like no other, and I “own” that ...
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:
A person 's beginnings do not completely define a person, but it does serve as a permanent foundation from which their identity is built around. As children, we absorb every sight and experience like porous sponges. Family, religion, environment, culture -- all of these aspects slowly form the background of one 's identity. As an Asian American, this identity is very different from that of a native Chinese woman 's, for I have parts of both cultures within me. It is a unique identity which I believes acts as a double edged sword. Being born into two cultures is a wonderful in that one can be a part of two cultures, but it is also a very confusing to be "divided" between two very different cultures.
Personal identity is about getting at the obligatory and adequate conditions for what it is to exist across time. Through this issue, we have a realist who believes in personal identity over time, a dualist claim that you are identical to a non-physical thing that is essentially different to fundamental physical things and it introduces new primitive terms that cannot be reduced to the soul, and we have a physicalism that is about personal identity claims that you are a physical thing and will offer an analysis in completely physical terms. We are trying to know the attitudes, beliefs, characteristics, interests, activities and relationships of an individual. Trying to find the aspect of our being that makes an individual who they are and who they are not. Every individual has their own identity, through life we can see that two
Self-identity is one of the main themes of philosophy throughout its history. In general, “self-identity” is a term that means thoughts or feelings with which you distinguish you from others, and we use the term in ordinary conversation without a solid concept of “self-identity”. However, arguing about self-identity philosophically, there arise many questions: whether there is any essence of yourself, whether you are the same person as you when you were a baby, whether memory or experience makes you, and what is “self-identity.” To solve these questions, many philosophers have been arguing the topic “self identity” for so long.