Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
John locke on personal identity sparknotes
John locke on personal identity sparknotes
John locke on personal identity sparknotes
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: John locke on personal identity sparknotes
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. Locke’s theory states that A is the same as B if and only if B remembers at T2 something done or experienced by A at T1. He often uses the word “consciousness” to help explain his theory, saying that one can remember back to a past conscious state, and can connect it to his current conscious state (Locke 367). I am currently conscious of my introspective experience of last Christmas, therefore I am the same person I was last Christmas, which is correct. Memories are also very personal, so they are exclusive to the person who possesses them. Although two people may share a similar memory, they do not have th...
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.
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 .
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).
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
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
This change does not change a person’s identity. Hume’s “Bundle Theory” defines personal identity as perceptions.
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
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:
When we tackle the question of 'What makes us the individual persons that we are?', one approach that we can take is to seek an answer to the question of what it is that is required for a person to continue to exist over time. If we could agree on what is required for it to be true that you continued to exist, then we would have good grounds to believe that we had discovered what makes someone the particular person they are, and by extension, what makes any person the person they are. In essence, what we are searching for are the necessary and sufficient conditions for personal identity over time.
Personal identity deals with the question, what makes it true for a person at one time to be identical with a person at another? Many philosophers believe we are always changing and therefore, we cannot have the same identity if we are different from one moment to the next. However, many philosophers believe something is an important feature in determining a person’s identity. For John Locke, this something is memory, and I agree. Memory is the most important feature in determining a person’s identity as memory is a necessary and sufficient condition of personal identity.
Locke believed that the identity of a person has the sameness of the consciousness: “What makes a man be himself to himself is sameness of consciousness, so personal identity depends entirely on that—whether the consciousness is tied to one substance throughout or rather is continued in a series of different su...
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.
The problem of personal identity is difficult to solve, especially since there is ambiguity in the terms. Identity may mean the same person or how one sees oneself. Anyhow, philosophers wish to assess this issue and find a suitable explanation, one motivation being responsibility. Humans will hold others responsible for acts such as murder, theft, and fraud. However, the person who will face the consequences must be the one who truly committed the wrongful act. A second motivation is interest in the future. An individual may become concerned or excited for an event that will occur in the future. Surely, these emotions entail that they will be the same person once that event occurs. The last motivation for resolving personal identity is immortality; basically, what will connect a person to whatever lives on after their physical death. Something can be identical in two ways: quantitatively or qualitatively. To be quantitatively identical is to be numerically identical, and to be qualitatively identical is to share exact qualities. There are two criterions on which personal identity is based, but the most important is the metaphysical criterion, which attempts to explain “being” or existence, without the necessity of physical evidence ...