Comparing Philosophers Locke And Hume On Personal Identity

In this paper, I will argue that the Memory Theory of Personal Identity is the closest to the truth. I will do so by showing that the opposing theories – Body and Soul Theories – have evident flaws and that the

John Locke and David Hume, both great empiricist philosophers who radically changed the way people view ideas and how they come about. Although similar in their beliefs, the two have some quite key differences in the way they view empiricism. Locke believed in causality, and used the example of the mental observation of thinking to raise your arm, and then your arm raising, whereas Hume believed that causality is not something that can be known, as a direct experience of cause, cannot be sensed. Locke believed that all knowledge is derived from our senses, which produce impressions on the mind which turn to ideas, whereas Hume's believed that all knowledge is derived from experiences,

The purpose of this essay is to define what Personal Identity is by analyzing John Locke’s argument for Personal Identity. John Locke’s argument for Personal Identity will be examined, in order to establish a better understanding of whether or not the argument for personal identity could be embraced. In order to do so, the essay will i) State and explain Locke’s argument that we are not substances or mere souls and ii) State and explain Locke’s concept of personal identity and its relations to what he calls self, consciousness and punishment. This essay will also focus on Thomas Reid’s perspective on personal identity and iii) State and explain Reid’s criticisms of Locke’s theory of personal identity, and lastly iv) I will evaluate whether or not Reid’s objections are good. Locke’s argument may seem to be plausible at first, however, the essay will conclude by rejecting John Locke’s argument for personal identity due to Locke’s inadequate reasonings and Thomas Reid’s criticisms.

The goal of the following paper is to convince that soul theory is directly linked to one’s personal identity. This paper will also point out an objection raised to the theory, and to finish will prove how that objection is incorrect, leaving soul theory as the only answer to what makes someone who they are.

In philosophy, the issue of personal identity concerns the conditions under which a person at one time is the same person at another time. An analysis of personal identity

In, “A Dialogue on Personal Identity and Immortality,” the author, John Perry, proposes three totally different ways of thinking about personal identity. The first theory is presented by a character named Gretchen Weirob, she believes that a person is their body. By this she means that a person’s identity is intertwined with the DNA and molecules of their body. Their personality as well as their personal identity can’t be separated from their body, and they cannot exist without it. The second theory was presented by a character named Sam Miller, he believes that a person is their immaterial soul. So in general, Sam thinks that the soul is this invisible, immaterial substance that is able to exist from the body. The third and final theory was presented by a character named Dave Cohen. Cohen believes that a person has continuity of memory, and/or psychology. So in general Cohen’s theory is that personal identity is a set of correlating experiences and/or memories enclosed in the brain. All three of the personal identity theories state some very valid points, but they also have some inconsistencies, some more than others. But there is one theory that seems to be the most credible, and creates a very compelling argument while also having a little science to back up some of its points.

Personal identity, in a philosophical point of view, is the problem of explaining what makes a person numerically the same over a period of time, despite the change in qualities. The major questions answered by Locke were questions concerning the nature of identity, persons, and immorality (Jacobsen, 2016). This essay will discuss the three themes John Locke presents in his argument regarding personal identity, which are, the concept of categories, substance vs. man vs. person, and the continuity of consciousness.

There is no concrete scientific answer to what makes up someone’s personal identity. This results in endless possibilities of perspectives and interpretations. John Locke makes some interesting claims about the link between memory and conciseness, to a person’s identity. “Personal identity that is, the sameness of a rational being-consists in consciousness

If on Tuesday, I suffer an accident and lose all of my memory, it is probable that my family and friends will still love and care for me, creating an impression that I am indeed the same person I once was. These conditions imply the theses of animalism and bodily continuity when it comes to personal identity. However, is this human habit enough to discard the idea that it is psychological continuity that sustains identity? Whilst many may argue that it would be against our intuition to say that I am no longer the same person, I do not believe that this is caused by our intuition, but instead a societal construct that’s sole purpose is to make the trauma of the accident and loss easier to deal with. By using this premise and upholding the psychological

In his essay Of Identity and Diversity, Locke talks about the importance of personal identity. The title of his essay gives an idea of his view. Identity, according to Locke, is the memory and self consciousness, and diversity is the faculty to transfer memories across bodies and souls. In order to make his point more understandable, Locke defines man and person. Locke identifies a man as an animal of a certain form and a person as a thinking intelligent being. Furthermore, to Locke, a person has reasons and reflections and can consider itself as being itself in different times and places; and he/she does it with his/her consciousness (429). Basically, personal self is a particular body and personal identity is consciousness. In this

I will argue that Locke believed that if you remain the same person, there are various entities contained in my body and soul composite that do not remain the same over time, or that we can conceive them changing. These entities are matter, organism (human), person (rational consciousness and memory), and the soul (immaterial thinking substance). This is a intuitive interpretation that creates many questions and problems. I will evaluate Locke's view by explaining what is and what forms personal identity, and then explaining how these changes do conceivably occur while a human remains the same person.

How is John Locke acknowledged in society? Rene Descartes became accredited by what? Well, people knew these men for their philosophical views, their views on identity varied undoubtedly. For example, Descartes famous line "I think, therefore I am" alludes to the fact that he most certainly exists. On the other hand, Locke believes that if you committed a crime, but cannot recall your actions, then you should not serve time for your crime. Hence, Descartes perspective of identity contains the self, as Locke reveals that identity is something that cannot have two things existing at the same time.

Hume starts off by stating how everyone is wrong about the views of personal identity. He believes that when a person changes over time and that there is no person that exists over time, because everyone changes. What we think is identity is actually impressions. There is no “self”, a self is just large amounts of impression or perceptions. Hume then explains why we think we know about identities when according to him, we don’t. According to him people have a tendency of putting objects or people that are related, have a resemblance, causation, etc. together, completely ignoring the small minor changes, especially when it’s the same common end. Hume also states that because of constant inference of our senses on objects and our prior impression

In a search for true identity, it is impossible to look at purely just the mind or just the body because a persons’ identity lies beyond the physicality of one’s reality. Many different debates have left people baffled when it comes to defining one’s identity or self. Descartes and Ghost in the shell explore in depth the means of their self.

Personal Identity or ‘Self’ has been a very important topic for philosophers for many years. Personal identity is how you describe or think of being which is derived from memories that have taken place over the years. John Locke was a philosopher who believed that your ‘Self’ or personal identity come from memory which is also referred to as consciousness in Locke’s writings. Locke believed that you are who you are, because your thoughts are yours alone no matter the vessel. However, in this paper we will go over a few instances where Locke’s theory on Personal Identity poses a few concerns and why those concerns prove his theory to be invalid.