Is Personal Identity in the Mind of the Beholder?

This paper will demonstrate how Locke’s Memory criterion and Parfit’s account of psychological continuity and connectedness is more similar than you think. Is Parfit’s account of psychological continuity and connectedness just an abstract perspective of Lock’s memory criterion and personal identity theory?

No doubt this position leaves plenty of room for criticism, which I will attempt to address now beginning with bodily continuity. The body is in a constant state of transition, cells replacing cells by the thousands at any given time; how then can bodily continuity even be if the body is in a perpetual state of change? How could one be considered the same person if the parts are constantly being replaced? For that matter, what if a person loses a limb and receives a prosthetic, would they be the same person then?

371). This responds to the objections raised by Thomas Reid in the 18th century (Shoemaker, 2008, p. 340), however, the Memory Theory did require a modification to include the possibility of temporarily forgetting the experiences of an earlier person-stage, “as long as one has the potentiality of remembering it” (Shoemaker, 2008, p. 340). In the conversations held by Gretchen Weirob, Sam Miller and Dave Cohen in Perry’s ‘Dialogue on Personal Identity and Immortality’ (Perry, 1977), this concept is addressed in depth. Miller relays a chapter written by Locke – “the relation between two person-stages or stretches of consciousness that makes them stages of a single person is just that the later one contains memories of an earlier one...I can remember only my past thoughts and feelings, and you only yours...take this relation as the source of identity” (Perry, 1977, p. 343). These concepts are logical possibilities in my opinion, and are far less unstable than those presented within the Body/Soul Theory, as these concepts do not require the senses of others, but the individual’s first person perception of their personal identity.

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.

A simple example of this is: The person is the same person as someone in the past if the person has the consciousness of the experience that the someone in the past did. Thus, the identity of a person is limited to how much the conscious of later person remembers their earlier conscious memories. Only then he is truly the same person or himself. But then this bring few questions: Can there be a the same thinking substance in different people or different thinking substance in the same person and how do we punish people? To answer the first question he believes that the issue lies whether a immaterial being with consciousness could have its consciousness of its past actions be completely removed then begin a life with new consciousness. Nonetheless if it was possible then Locke argues that there is no reason to say that the person who’s soul and conscious lived before the removal is the same person whose new consciousness took over. To answer the second part, Locke says that the answer depends on whether the conscious of the past actions can be transferred to another person who did not experience it. Locke believes this phenomenon is possible and if it was, would this person be the same person he was before? Yes. Using Locke’s theory where

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

The two cases are related in that they are the same exact situation. Locke and Williams both use two people in which they will swap memories. However, the way they describe it, makes it entirely different. Locke

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.

Bernard Williams, initially illustrates psychological continuity in his paper The Self and the Future with the example that if one was to undergo a brain transplant, “your memories and other mental features, the resulting person would be convinced that he or she was you”. Williams describes how persons A and B are changing bodies, then “A chooses that the B-body-person should get the pleasant treatment and the A-body-person the unpleasant treatment”. Through Williams’ phrasing this notion seems like the intuitive choice to pick, given that if we are switching bodies, then (if I am A), I assume that I am now inhabiting the B-body-person. Using this premise, it seems clear that I am only what stems from my memories, thus I am identified by my psychological continuity; on the surface, this seems difficult to contest. However, Williams, goes on to illustrate how in the premise of this argument there is an assumption. Williams defines the thought experiment again, but depersonalises person B, and instead claims that “changes in his character are produced, and at the same time certain illusory “memory" beliefs are induced in him;”this is essentially the same process as what happen in the first instance, however, Williams refrains from referring to what happens to the second person. Consequently, person A does not wish for the A-body-person to be tortured, even though given the conclusion form the first example this body now contains a different person. Given person A’s emotive response, it would perhaps appear that, despite the lack of psychological continuity, the A-body-person may in fact still be person A; therefore, psychological continuity may not be an appropriate way to claim someone is the same person. Nevertheless, can we genuinely claim that this emotive response can create a genuine criticism for this psychological continuity, therefore

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

John Locke believed, the enduring self is defined by a person’s memory. With memory there is an enduring self, and without it there is no self at all. I believe there is an enduring self, but it is a little more complicated than that. Even if a person encounters a dramatic change to his/her life, they are still the same self, the same person. I believe memory is not the only factor that defines the self. Many things form this enduring self, and these things work together to form an identity, to form who you are now. These things are your memories, your experiences and your personality. You may change and grow over time as you are exposed to new experiences, but under it all you are still ....you. But is a

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.

Locke on the other hand, believes that personal identity is explained by mental continuity. He defines a person as someone who is intelligent and able to think, someone who has the same thinking in different locations and times. That being has to be able to reflect and reason who they

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.

John Locke a seventeenth century Philosopher uses a number of thought experiments in his 1690 account, ’An Essay concerning Human Understanding’. He uses these thought experiments to help explain his definition of the self and personal identity. The thought experiments that are used, go some way in explaining his opinions and in clarifying the role that memory plays in defining the term. Although defining personal identity was and still is a complex subject and not all philosophers share the same views.