Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
How do memories shape our identity
Memory and self identity essay
Memory and self identity essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: How do memories shape our identity
Throughout A Dialogue on Personal Identity and Immortality, Gretchen Weirob makes four central assertions regarding the possibility of personal identity and immortality, which are supported by four examples that are used recurrently between herself, the two arguing on behalf of personal identity and immortality, Sam Miller and Dave Cohen. The four assertions are: (1) if personal identity is real and definable, but unobservable, how can personal identity be identified by oneself or others?(2) If memory theory explains personal identity, by what means is this successfully accomplished? (3) personal identity cannot be independent of the body if it is located in the brain. (4) If immortality is feasible through duplication of personal identities …show more content…
Locke argues that personal identity is not measured through anything physical or observable, but rather, a person’s ability to recall the past memories and the connections between them. Although Weirob would argue otherwise, stating that the body and the conscious must have some connection and exclusivity, however Locke offers an interesting example as a rebuttal. He argues, if one were to take a knife and cut their own pinkie finger off, they would still be the same person with the same memories, regardless of what body parts remain attached or otherwise. In addition, he argues that identity is also dependent on the idea that two things cannot be the same and exist in two places. By their nature, being in two different locations makes them different, inherently. The implications of this view have been well challenged by Weirob, and the two conditions described by Locke coincide one another. If identity is unobservable by anyone but themselves through memory recall, how can you prove there isn’t someone out there with the same real memory recall? If it can only be proven inside our own minds, how would anyone be able to prove that someone doesn’t have the same memories without some form of telepathy? As we can assume telepathy is unlikely, what can be drawn from this conclusion is …show more content…
However, the more distressing conclusion that can be drawn from this is that without a personal identity, how can anyone be held liable for their actions? Or worse, if personal identity and immortality do not exist, does that render all of our experiences, morals, and actions as utterly pointless and expendable? How can one even accustom themselves into modern society with this worldview? Ultimately, the quote mentioned by Miller was quite accurate, “A little philosophy turns one away from religion, but that deeper understanding brings one back.” Perhaps, even with this deeper knowledge that personal identity and immortality does not exist, we are all faced with choice to find spiritual answer to assuage ourselves into functioning normally in society; or accept the knowledge that neither truly exists and live life outside of the moral and societal norms of the
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
Parfit’s view on the nature of persisting persons raises interesting issues in terms of identity. Though there are identifiable objections to his views, I am in favor of the argument he develops. This paper will layout Parfit’s view on that nature of persisting person, show support as well as argue the objections to the theory. In Derek Parfit’s paper Personal Identity, Parfit provides a valid account of persisting persons through time through his clear account of psychological continuities. He calls people to accept the argument that people persist through time but people do not persist or survive by way of identity.
Although the concept of identity is recurrent in our daily lives, it has interpreted in various ways.
Personal immortality seems to be a paradox that many people address and distinguish in different ways. Through outlets such as religion, science, or personal belief this topic is often argued and habitually facilitates strong arguments. Weirob and Miller explicitly explain their dualist/physicalist outlooks on personal immortality as they have a conversation at the hospital where Weirob slowly succumbs to her injuries received in a motorcycle accident. As Weirob patiently awaits death, Miller explains how due to Weirobs realist view on life he will not try to “comfort [her] with the prospect of life after death” (Perry, pg. 65). Due to Weirobs state of unavoidable demise she asks Miller to entertain her with the argument for life after death,
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).
Weirob believes that personal identity is consisting of combination of a person’s thoughts, memories, feelings, and experiences. According to her: “Survival means that tomorrow
In David Lewis’ article “An Argument for Identity Theory” Lewis defends the psychoneural identity theory, arguing that mental states or experiences are neural states. In his main argument, he argues that physics can explain the causal relationship between mental states or experiences and physical phenomena. He uses an analogy of a cylindrical combination lock to explain the causal role that mental states play in producing physical phenomena. In order to put the lock into a state of being “unlocked”
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
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.
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
Identity, an ambiguous idea, plays an important part in today’s world. To me identity can be defined as who a person is or what differentiates one person from another. Identity would be a person’s name, age, height, ethnicity, personality, and more. A quote by Anne Sexton states “It doesn't matter who my father was; it matters who I remember he was”(Anne Sexton). This quote helps me define identity because I believe it is saying that identity is what people are remembered by. When some people think of identity, words such as, uniqueness, distinctiveness, or individuality may come to mind. However, I disagree with this because when I think of identity I think of mimicry, self-consciousness, or opinions.
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.