David Hume And Rene Descartes

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

Identity is what makes a person unique. It is the soul and the essence of a human being. People are not born with a fixed identity. Identity is inherently dynamic; it changes and evolves over time. A person’s identity is ultimately shaped by their decisions. My identity is different from those who surround me. I create my own identity.

Identity is anything that can provide us with a way of answering what we are. I believe that there is a core basis of

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.

Rationalism is the theory that opinions and actions should be based on reason and knowledge rather than religious belief or emotional, while empiricism is the theory that knowledge is derived from senses-experience which stimulated the rise of experimental science. The philosophers Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Locke, Berkeley, and Hume all have different views on the existence and nature of external objects. Some see it as the view on objects as everything is sense related other see it that it is all from thought but the object is not existent.

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

Personal identity is essential in the human experience. Identity is complex and can be broken down into two main groups: introspective identity, and bodily identity. Introspective identity is based off of the groups, mentalities, or beliefs that you align yourself with, and bodily identity is based off of the physical side of yourself. Whether physical or introspective, your identity impacts every action you take. Whether choices ranging from what colors you prefer to which college you want to attend are primarily based off of your introspective identity, which is a combination of both memory and consciousness, physical identity impacts how others perceive you. Consciousness is mainly the awareness of bodily identity as well as continuous introspective identify, while memory is awareness of introspective identity. These two different facets of identity are imperative in the distinction between bodily identity and introspective identity. In means of personal identity introspective identity (which is evident in memory), is essential, while bodily identity (based partially in consciousness) has less credit.

     Hume on the other hand, took a different approach to the idea of self. He believed that there in fact was no such thing as selfhood. Instead he asserts that “it must be some one impression, that gives rise to every real idea. But self…is not any one impression, but that to which our several impressions and ideas are supposed to have a reference…” (597). By this he implies that in order to form concrete ideas, ones impressions of pain, pleasure, joy, etc. must be invariable throughout time. This, Hume states, we know without a doubt to be impossible. Passions succeed each other over time and give rise to new passions, therefore “…it cannot be from any of these impressions…that the idea of self is derived, and consequently there is no such idea” (597).

Who are you? What defines who you are? Why makes you who you are? What is your personal identity? Have you ever sat around pondering the meaning of life, or maybe just your life? Have you asked yourself any of these questions? What were your answers? These are questions that people have been trying to answer since the beginning of time, before me and you were ever born or thought of. People live their whole lives trying to figure out exactly who they are and what their purpose is in life. In the field of philosophy, many philosophers have had theories on personal identity and a person’s “self.” These people have gone down in history books for their theories on a person’s identity: John Locke and Rene’ Descartes. These are two of the most

Personal identity is a concept within philosophy that has persisted throughout its history. In the eighteenth century this problem came to a head. David Hume dedicated a portion of his philosophy in the attempts to finally put what he saw as a fallacious claim concerning the soul to rest. In the skeptical wake of Hume, German idealist, beginning with Immanuel Kant, were left with a variety of epistemic and metaphysical problems, the least of which was personal identity.

Philosophers over time have tried to explain their understanding on the view of personal identity some of the like Rene Descartes adding the views of the existence of the material souls or egos. His views on the existence of egos suggest that people have bodies which can die but still they continue to exist. In as such other philosophers proposed diverging views from him suggesting that such a simple

In general we differentiate between two “kinds” of identity. On the one hand there is the so called social identity, which stresses self-interpretation as a member of a certain social group and on the other hand there is the personal identity, which puts it´s emphasis on individuality and distinctiveness. This distinction is widely known as “patchwork-identity”. Both identities are only a subgroup of many different subjectively interpreted identities that everyone of us has innate.

Identity is what evolves us, it is what makes us think the way we do, and act the way we act, in essence, a person’s identity is their everything. Identity separates us from everyone else, and while one may be very similar to another, there is no one who is exactly like you; someone who has experienced exactly what you have, feels the way you do about subjects, and reacts the same to the events and experiences you have had. This became prevalent to me as I read through many books, that everyone goes through the process of finding who they are. A prevalent theme throughout literature is the idea that over time one develops their identity through life over time, in contrast to being born with one identity and having the same

Many people question themselves, what is it exactly that makes them unique? What is it that defines them as a unique person that no one in the world possesses? In philosophy, these questions do not have just one answer, and all answers are correct depending on which theory appeals most and makes sense to you. In general, there are two ways people approach this question, some say that a person’s identity is the “self” that carries all of their experiences, thoughts, memories, and consciousness (ego theorists), and some say that a person’s identity is just a bundle of experiences and events that a person has been through in their life, these people deny that the “self” exists (bundle theorists). In this paper, I will be arguing that a person’s identity is just a bundle of experiences, denying the self and the memory criterion.

While numerous philosophers have debated how to quantify personal identity, It is my contention that Rene Descartes presents the best argument .This essay will examine the strengths and weaknesses within his theory. This essay will also also compare Descartes argument to Rick Parfit and David Humes individual interpretations of what personal identity is. Lastly, this essay will examine the weaknesses within Descartes argument and the points some have contention with.