Locke’s theory was opposed, objected and scrutinized by many modern philosophers like John Perry and Thomas Reid. Locke was the first one to separate out the specific issue of personal identity from the larger topic of identity in general. Locke's treatment of personal identity might seem counterintuitive to a lot of people, especially his claim that consciousness, and therefore personal identity, are independent of all substances. Notice, however, that the claim is not that consciousness can exist independent of a body or a mind, only that there is no reason to assume that consciousness is tied to any particular body or mind. Still, there is no reason to assume, on this view, that consciousness cannot be transferred from one body or mind …show more content…
to another (think of a science fiction example where all of one's thoughts are transferred to a computer chip, so that consciousness moves from the mind to the computer). That consciousness exists independent of material substance (i.e. body) is the more intuitive notion. Locke gives an example to illustrate just how intuitive this notion is: When a finger is cut off from a man's hand, it is clearly no longer a part of his consciousness; he is no more conscious of any effects on this finger than he is conscious of effects on any other man's finger. This is true not only for parts of the body but for the whole body as well, Locke insists. If the consciousness of one man were somehow transferred into another body so that the second body now contained all the memories of thoughts and actions that the first man once contained (but does no more), the person would now inhabit the second body and not the first. What is much less intuitive is Locke's claim that a person's identity is separate from any immaterial substance (i.e. mind) as well. After all, consciousness is inextricably connected to thought, and the mind is defined as the thinking thing. Consciousness, though, Locke insists, is not tied to any one mind even if it does require some mind or other.
In addition to being somewhat counterintuitive, the claim that consciousness is independent of any mind raises some thorny problems. As a really existing thing, consciousness must either be a substance or a quality of a substance. Since Locke admits that consciousness cannot exist on its own, but must be part of some mind or other, it seems likely that consciousness is a property that belongs to minds. It is not clear, though, that a property can simply be transferred from one substance to another. A property belongs to a substance in a very intimate way. To say, then, that consciousness does not belong to any one mind in particular seems to indicate that it is not a property. If it were a substance, though, it would be able to exist independent of any mind at all. Locke does allow that he is not sure whether consciousness can, in fact, be transferred between thinking things, but he dismisses the practical question as irrelevant. However, this practical question might hold part of the answer to the nature of consciousness: whether it is just a property or something more substantial. Locke's theory of personal identity is also on doubt. For instance, imagine that a man commits a crime, but at the time of trial he does not remember committing the crime. Would Locke be forced to say that the man who committed the crime was an entirely different person from the man on trial? Locke would probably respond that so long as the man on trial had some memories connecting his consciousness to the consciousness of his self at that earlier date, he could still be considered the same person, regardless of whether he remembered the specific crime. Consider, though, another example: An old man who cannot remember anything about his youth. Is he a different person from the one who lived his young life? A critic says that this type of consideration into an objection
that reveals that Locke's theory of identity is actually inconsistent. Imagine a man in three stages of his life; the objection goes, childhood, middle age, and old age. The middle-aged man can remember his childhood, while the old man can only remember middle age. According to Locke's view, the middle-aged man is the same person as the child, and the old man is the same person as the middle-aged man, and yet the old man is not the same person as the child. This, of course, is logically incoherent and shows that Locke's view is untenable as it stands. Though Locke's theory of personal identity fails, it is significant both for being the first attempt at such a theory, as well as the theory upon which all further attempts have built.
One of Locke’s largest points is "All ideas come from sensation or reflection” (Locke 101). He thinks that man is completely blank when they are born and that their basic senses are what gives them knowledge. Locke states, “Let us then suppose the mind to be, as we say, white paper” (Locke 101). Locke is basically saying that human nature is like a blank slate, and how men experience life in their own ways is what makes them good or evil. Overall, Locke believes that any and all knowledge is only gained through life
Locke clarified the problem by pointing out his notions that mostly derived from the natural state of human beings. Each man was originally born and predestined to have his own body, hands, head and so forth which can help him to create his own labor. When he knew how to use his personal mind and labor to appropriate bountiful subjects around him, taking them "out of the hands of...
Providing the 17th century world with an alternative, innovative view on philosophy, politics, economics, and education among other interrelated and important aspects of life, John Locke proved to be a person of immense impact. Born in 1632, in Wrington, England, Locke was the author of many known writings which include the Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689), The Two Treaties of Government (1698), A Letter Concerning Toleration (1689), and Some Thoughts Concerning Education (1693) (Goldie 32). Locke’s writings represent a series of topics involving the purpose of philosophy, the emergence of empiricism, and the role as well as limits of governments and churches in terms of liberty and natural rights. In a time where exposure of such controversial ideas would jeopardize the well-being of an author, it is no wonder that Locke postponed the publishing of his writings until after the Glorious Revolution of 1688. However, what impact did Locke’s ideas have on philosophy?
Locke believes that everyone is born as a blank slate. According to Locke there is no innate human nature but human nature is something we create. And because we are born as an equal blank slate all men have the opportunity to create human nature therefore Locke believed all men are created equal. Unlike Bentham Locke believed that government needed to take a step back and allow for each individual to have the right to three things: life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. The Governments role should not be in dictating people what to do but to allow individuals to their three
For individual property to exist, there must be a means for individuals to appropriate the things around them. Locke starts out with the idea of the property of person; each person owns his or her own body, and all the labor that they perform with the body. When an individual adds their own labor, their own property, to a foreign object or good, that object becomes their own because they have added their labor. This appropriation of goods does not demand the consent of humankind in general, each person has license to appropriate things in this way by individual initiative.
Throughout time almost political points have some type of shape or form around gods and priests. Mr. Locke had the capability to express his theory without using too much god into his works. He believed that god created us to achieve our own happiness while avoiding fear and pain and political leaders shouldn’t push their beliefs on to other people. This is where his nature and nurture also comes in because everyone has their own experiences and reasoning’s, so there would always be some conflict of ideas. Although, Mr. Locke’s idea was influenced off Mr. Hobbles they both have very different
Locke was born in Somerset, England into a well-to-do family. At that time, there was a small class of people, the Aristocracy, who owned and controlled the vast majority of land, resources, military power and wealth. Eventhough, he come from a wealthy family, Locke saw there are injustice in this situation. The not have family had to work as peasants, and were no longer in control of their own lives, but rather lived, toiled and died at the whims of others. ...
Locke and Hume both agree that memory is key to define personal identity. Locke believes that memory and consciousness define personal identity. While Hume’s thinks it is the source of personal identity, he does not fully agree with Locke and thinks that memory reveals personal identity, it does not create it. They both agree that there is a change; Locke understands that a person changes and what relates everything to who we are is
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) Locke viewed the identity of living entities in a different light. Above, change in mass constituted a change in identity. But, in living entities a change in mass does not affect the identity of the object.
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
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
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.
Locke is a supporter that identity is a psychological thing rather then physical. While on the other hand Descartes believes identity is broken into two different categories which are body and soul. They are the same in the case that Descartes believes that thinking is found in the soul which is tied together to Lockes associating identity to a thinking mental state. They are different in the aspect Descartes believes that identity is also physical instead of just psychological. Desecrates believes the body and soul need each other like a “Pilot in his ship” (Hallman 50). He explains how the soul is “Joined to the body” (Hallman 48) at the pineal gland. His conclusion is the soul uses the body until the body dies and the soul moves on. To support Lockes theory of strictly psychological continuity he explains, even though a tiny finger is cut off does not mean the persons identity and consciousness goes along with it. Lastly he supports his theory by saying as time goes on “We lose sight of our past selves” (Hallman 14), Which supports that identity is a mental state. I believe Locke proves a better argument. I feel this way because Descartes feels a a spirit sends signals to a gland in a persons brain that determines what they do. I feel Locke proves his point well, that the mind is always changing and the identity is made up of a psychological mental
John Locke was an English philosopher and Physician. Locke was born on August 29, 1632 in Wrington, Somerset. He was viewed as one of the most important philosophers. Not only that, Locke was classified as the “Father of Liberalism” and founded the school of empiricism. He inspired both the European Enlightenment and the Constitution of the United States.
a. Philosopher John Locke would argue that Memento’s main character Leonard cannot be categorized as a person. Much of Locke’s theory on personal identity relies on a person’s consciousness. Consciousness, as Locke defines it, is anything that makes up a person, in many ways memory is another form of consciousness. Because Locke believes identity was tied to one’s consciousness, he also theorized memories give an individual their personal identity. Locke believed memories create a person’s sense of self, Locke even went as far as to hypothesize that if I forget what I ate for lunch today I am then a completely different person than the “me” one who ate lunch. In Leonard’s case, his memory was nonexistent, every two minutes he forgot everything