Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on personal identities
Personal Identity Essay
Essay on personal identities
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on personal identities
Personal Identity
In John Perry’s “A Dialogue on Personal Identity and Immorality,” John Perry describes three concepts of thinking in an effort to find the answer to the perplexing idea of personal identity. The concepts include the Soul Theory, the Body Theory, and the Memory Theory. These three notions are basically hypotheses on what makes up for a person’s identity and they all question who you are now, who you were then, and who you will be in the future. The idea of personal identity is a big philosophical debate because a body is not enough indication to who a person is because human bodies scientifically change over time as humans grow and form a new genetic makeup. The body that a person had when they are 2 years old is not the same body that they will have when they are 40 years old and so because of this, Perry’s three theories try to create a different approach to personal identity, as the human body is not enough.
John Perry’s three theories are stated as the Soul, Memory, and Body Theory. The Soul Theory is the idea that a person’s soul is what makes them who they are and that people are identical to their souls, not bodies. When your body dies, you—your soul—lives on even though your physical body is rotting away in the ground and that soul is an innate part of who you are. The Memory Theory argues that a person’s memory is what makes up their identity. So, who you are now is the same person as when you are a baby because you have the same memories. If you remember when you are 20 being 8 years old playing baseball for the first time, then you are the same person. The Body Theory argues that bodily identity is what makes up human identity. A person knows that they are the same person because they can see that ...
... middle of paper ...
...over the years? The soul may be an immaterial thing but it is also an innate part of who we are and since it is not connected to the body physically then it should not change. The nature of souls is that it will always be the same soul, so what makes us believe that there are many different other souls? Yes, finding proof of the existence of a soul is next to impossible because it is an untouchable, unattainable object, but many philosophical arguments do not have much actual scientific evidence proving theories right or wrong. Logical theories and reasoning have to be the determining factors in many of these discussions as going and trying to find real facts is not the most efficient thing to do. The Soul Theory has the most logic and reasoning towards personal identity, so therefore it is the most reasonable answer to John Perry’s “A Dialogue on Personal Identity
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
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.
The soul is linked to a body and through our bodies it can hold our apparent memories of the past that can give us evidence of our identity over time with diachronic personal identity theory. We typically identify people by things like their physical appearance and the sound of their voice, but it is hard to personally identify someone in terms of physical appearance and sameness of voice. Therefore, it can be explained in terms of our memories and sameness of our brains. On the psychological theory, which explains personal identity in terms of apparent memory, but to explain why my apparent memories justify me in believing that the same immaterial soul has been attached to my body for the duration of my life. Therefore, Swinburne’s counter argument is based on memory and perception based on the body. With memory playing into an effect, the certain religions that specify that the soul will live on into reincarnation is a slim chance and that know could know for sure if it is absolutely
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).
The only logical conclusion to derive from this observation is that what we consider to be ourselves is not our bodies. As a result, an individual’s personal identity cannot be rooted in just his or her body, unlike what body theorists would like to
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.
If an individual loses his past self, would he still be the same individual? According to the personal identity memory theory by John Locke, as long as a person is the same self, the personal identity of that person is the same. But for Leonard Shelby who is the main character if the Memento film, this does not apply after he suffered a condition that hinders him from creating new memories. This paper addresses the topic of the truth of John Locke’s perception of personal identity which follows that Leonard does not have a personal identity. The paper reviews the Memento film which is a psychological thriller which presents two different personal identities of Leonard Shelby after suffering from a memory condition. The paper
Derek Parfit is a philosopher who, in Part 3 of his book Reasons and Persons, explores the question of personal identity. He asks what aspect of a person defines their identity. Parfit goes about with thought experiments to examine how he would define a person’s identity to be. Two theories he discusses are the theory of Physical Criterion and the theory of Wide Psychological Criterion. By using two theory desiderata (general traits that strong theories should possess), explanatory power and existing beliefs, it can be shown that the personal identity theory of Wide Psychological Criterion is the most plausible one.
I have shown throughout this essay that we can determine personal identity solely based on psychological continuity. During John Perry’s dialogue he says that there are only three ways in which we can tell a person is who they are. Those three ideas being a person is their body, a person has a continuation of memory, or a person is their immaterial soul. Through the whole of this essay we have discussed that even though bodily identity and immaterial souls are a good suggestions for determining personal identity that they really aren’t logical theories. I have argued that we can distinguish personal identity from psychological continuity.
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:
The view of identity seems to be defined by facial features and social constructed views. Depending on the recent look of someone it may just be more then just color but also background. In this essay I will explain how I relate to some recent views based on philosophers I may agree and disagree with in order to describe my identity. Identity is much more then just being labeled as a race, it can be based on much more.
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.
Briefly, we can conclude by deduction that body, brain, and soul are not sufficient to explain personal identity. Personal identity and immortality will always cause questions to arise from philosophers, as well as other individuals, and although many philosophers may object and disagree, the memory criterion offers the most sufficient explanation.
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.
The soul can be defined as a perennial enigma that one may never understand. But many people rose to the challenge of effectively explaining just what the soul is about, along with outlining its desires. Three of these people are Plato, Aristotle, and Augustine. Even though all three had distinctive views, the similarities between their views are strikingly vivid. The soul indeed is an enigma to mankind and the only rational explanation of its being is yet to come and may never arrive.