Human Continuity Of Personal Identity

No matter how much a person desires to live according to their personal autonomy, he or she will never escape the influence of societal forces. Explicitly or subtlety, these forces shape our individuality. One intriguing manner that these societal forces manifests itself in is our name. As Ruth Graham writes, “It’s becoming increasingly clear today that names carry a wealth of information about the world around us, the family we arrived in, the moment we were born—and that they mark us as part of cultural currents bigger than we realize.” Names alone provide evidence that individuals are made by interactions with social institutions and groups. Ultimately, the inescapable nature of society’s influence demands individuals to ponder how much personal autonomy is actually autonomous and to what extent does the pursuit of personal autonomy lead to a life of emptiness and vanity.

With any philosophical theory, there are many different sides to each topic. The first argument that will be discussed about personal identity is the psychological approach. People who stand by the psychological approach concerning personal identity believe that a person’s memories and their personality traits make up who they are. According to this approach, throughout your life you will continue to be the same person because your memories and personality will never

The canonical school of thought that is employed as a counter to the psychological continuity account of personal identity is one called animalism. Animalists argue that we are animals. Philosopher John Locke described animalism such that “An animal is a living organized body; and consequently the same animal … is the same continued life communicated to different particles of matter, as they happened successively to be united to that organized living body … This also shows wherein the identity of the same man consists; viz. in nothing but a participation of the same continued life, by constantly fleeting particles of matter, in succession vitally united to the same organized body.” Consequently, animalism implies that psychological continuity does not accurately describe what we are. For example, if a human is forced into a permanent comatose state for whatever reason, that human will cease to experience characteristic psychological events, nonetheless, she will still exist as an individual, i.e., she will still have a functioning cardiovascular

society and what is expected of us in line with our gender, class and culture?

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.

Bodily Identity View: Personal Identity persists over time because you remain in the same body from birth until death.

My aim in this essay is to analyze in this order the ideas of personal identity, human nature, and reality. The following essays and films will be analyzed: "Divided Minds and the Nature of Persons", "The Selfish Cooperator", "Does the Real World Exist", Transfer, I Am and The Signal. In Derek Parfit 's "Divided Minds and the Nature of Persons", we learn that personal identity is ever changing, whereas in Richard Dawkin 's essay "The Selfish Cooperator" we are taught that human nature is circumstantial, and finally John Searle argues in "Does the Real World Exist" that reality exists and can be independent of us.

Individual identity is constructed by many things, ranging from perceptions from others to perception of self, and is constantly changing as life’s complexities increase. Fear, or the distressing feeling of anxiety and angst, is also an unlikely but extremely important component of composition of identity as one gets older, for it is fear that shapes identification and interaction, especially in a group setting. A case where this is apparent is within Predominantly White Institutions, or PWIs, and the interactions between dominant and minority, namely Black, students. In a social setting where stereotypes and discrimination exists due to a variety of existing cultures and lifestyles, it is fear that forms social groups, guides

I completely agree with you. it seems to hard to imagine something and definitely cannot understand it. no one knows what they are going through until they are on their shoes. people would never understand how to live to be them, it is as hard to live it such disorder as it hard to understand. Imagine come back to true self and have someone else tell you about the damage you have done that you have absolutely no idea about. that suck right, living with multiple identities, is something that really hard to live with, if one ever has someone with disorder they should try their best to understand them.

Identity today carries the notion that it is affected by the social environment. Everything connected to social affects behavior and cognitive aspects – dreams, aspirations, habits and ways of life – of an individual. The asserted identity of individuals influences the way they form their beliefs, behavior, and dispositions. Hernandez et al (2007) added that place identity is a process by which people describe their sense of belonging to a place as people interact with their place, and thus making place identity as part of personal identity.

The Memory Criterion of Personal Identity: A person P1 who exists at t1 is identical to a person P2 who exists at a later time t2 ifš P2 is at t2 and is conscious of any of the thoughts or actions of P1 at t1, then P2 is P1. This theory reveals why it is essential to integrate psychological continuity into the discussion of personal identity. The Memory Criterion of Personal Identity is compatible with the Biological View because it doesn’t argue that the mind and body are separate entities. It is entirely possible according to this view that all a person’s mental occurrences and characteristics only exist because of physical events.

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.

Not everyone has equal opportunities, some exert more choice and some face constraints when it comes to making and remaking their lives. Stephanie Taylor (2014. P.5) highlights that there are different identities and belonging to one can give your more or less of an advantage. Gender identity defines male, females, transsexuals etc. but there are certain job roles in society that are either male or female dominant. For example, you expect an air hostess to be female, and so if applying as a male, the decision to do this is constrained by society’s perception or that person and he may be subject to prejudices, or their own beliefs may act as a deterrent. A female applying would meet the social norms. This is also a good example where agency (capacity of the individual to act independently, exert free will) is constrained by structure (Patterned social arrangements that affect agency).

Everyone has an identity. A person's characters are the combination of their memories, thoughts, feelings, and personal experiences. If you are meeting someone new for the first time, what do you see? Their difficult childhood? Their struggles to get where they are? People can only see other’s outer identity and not their character because the components that are the core of one’s character is covered up by their external identity, the labels. The labels shape a person's social and personal identity in society and the environment they grew up in, conforming them to the norm and dispossesses the identities of those who are different.

In Western society, the Other refers to a person outside of socially accepted identities. The Other is often viewed as the lesser of a binary pair. Like all binaries, the socially accepted identity and the Other constantly struggle against each other in a push and pull motion. In his book, Modernity and Ambivalence, Zygmut Bauman illustrates this dichotomy: "Woman is the other of man, animal is the other of human, stranger is the other of native, abnormality the other of norm, deviation the other of law-abiding, illness the other of health, insanity the other of reason, lay public the other of the expert, foreigner the other of state subject, enemy the other of friend" (Bauman 1991: 8). This power dynamic perpetuates itself socially and biologically. Humans adapt over time, repeating, editing, and translating both biological and social traits. Our subjective identity is a consequence of what our bodies experience objectively. Through combining subjective and objective experience within our bodies, society's fear of the Other is put into question.