Personal Contiguity And Personal Identity

Working in conjunction with memory is consciousness, consciousness is the definition of the self; it is the mind’s capacity to point beyond itself, differentiating between itself and an object creating awareness of “I” throughout bodily and memory changes. Consciousness is the heart of free will and intent, it is responsible for the ability of a person to choose. With that said, it is my belief that defining personal identity relies on both bodily and mental continuity.

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.

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.

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.

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.

272). Rather, the persistence of the same consciousness over time means that the person remains the same, not whether he or she is in the same physical body or not (Stephens, p. 84). For example, recalling back to my prior high school knowledge, the story of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde can be applied for evidence that a person’s identity remains the same no matter what body its consciousness is found in. In the story, Dr. Jekyll turns into the monster Mr. Hyde after he drinks a potion. Although, Dr. Jekyll’s physical appearance is no longer the same, his consciousness is.

My family shaped my personal and social identity at a micro level by being the first set of influencers the moment I was born. My personal identity is significantly influenced by my family through the approach that my parents have taken to raise and nurture me. The results of my parents raising me is shown through the behaviour and beliefs that I embody. For example, because of my family I have always been aware that there is a God. In consequence, my compliant behaviour towards religion has already been constructed at a young age. Moreover, my social identity’s structure was shaped by my family through they way they have socially interacted with me. My micro level interactions with my family throughout time has created a deeply rooted influence within me. The influence that my family has had on my social identity is demonstrated in the way that I respond in certain social situations. For example, through behavioural observation as a child I have learned not to speak back to my parents when they are lecturing me.

Sexual relationships and gender are important aspects of life that help form social relationships and an individual’s personal identity. Despite many of the benefits that being able to express one’s sexuality and gender can provide, both aspects of life come with various misconceptions. For example, “We know what causes sexual orientation” is a statement that is not true since scientists do not have an exact cause or evidence to support a cause for sexual preference (American Psychological Association, 2010). Sexual orientation is the gender preferences an individual has when choosing a sexual partner such as an individual identifying themselves as bisexual, homosexual or heterosexual (King, 2016). There has been research that has identified possible factors that may play a role in determining the sexual orientation of an individual such as cultural and biological factors (American Psychological Association, 2010). Additionally, with the discovery of possibilities for sexual orientation there has also been research that has found aspects of person’s life that have no impact on sexual orientation such as how parents reared their children (King, 2016).

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

When it comes to personal identity and survival of the self, it is difficult to say what defines a person throughout time. The three arguments are for the body, soul, and brain. These theories argue that each respective component of a person, must remain the same throughout time in order for a person to be unchanged. The brain theory is more plausible than its counterparts. To prove this, first, I will describe the soul and body theories, which I oppose, and then present an argument based on the brain transplant theory. A criticism for this is Perry’s third night argument that states the body donor is the surviving factor. My rebuttal for his counterargument uses Cohen and Miller’s Conventionalist Argument to support my original statement.

My purpose is to show my individuality and to express myself. This is for others including myself, to see and to remind us that our identity is very complex.

Everybody has an identity, it makes them individual and unique, and it defines who you are as a person. This project about my identity showed me what makes me unique. I would have never known how much my friends mean to me or how my identities connect with each other. I have three identities that make me who I am, cultural, personal, and social. A specific quality that covers my cultural identity is being Czechoslovakian. Both sides of my family have at least a part of Czech in them. My great-grandparents are from Czech Republic and my grandpa was the first generation in America, he was born in Ohio. This is very important because I have always identified as Czech and it is a big part of me, as I am so interested in ancestry. For my personal identity, the biggest part is my personality, being loud and outgoing, has always been important to me. The reason being, it is how people view me. A lot of people know me as the loud person or the person who talks a lot. That is meaningful to me considering I like people to view me in a certain way The last identity, social, is one of the most important to me because it involves my friends, and through this project, I learned how vital they really are to my social identity. I realized that I have a good amount of friends in this project. It is nice to have people as a support system and to relate with. These qualities show that I value being loud and outgoing. It also says that I value my family and they are a big part of life. The last one, social, ties in with the first one because it shows I am outgoing and friendly.

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.

wants to preserve some aspects of oneself from the past so that the past is sustaining and