John Locke's Psychological criterion for personal Identify
Timothy P. McKay
Student: 250691978
John Locke's account of identity was a radical rethinking on the subject of personal identity. Moreover, his conception of personal identity shaped modern thought about the subject by placing the emphasis on a psychological criterion . Locke argued that there is a distinction between the human being, the person, and the soul, and that the identity of the person relies upon the continuation of the same consciousness. In other words, Locke believed that personal identity remains if the same consciousness remained. However, at the time of publication, Locke was heavily criticised by those who argued that his uses of the word 'consciousness' was too ambiguous. Some, such as Thomas Reid, interpreted Locke as equating consciousness with memory, and as a result of the fallible nature of memory, argued that Locke's account of personal identity failed .
The purpose of this paper is to explore Locke's account of personal identity and show that critics of Locke's account wrongfully advocate for an interpretation that equates consciousness to memory. Section one of this paper will discuss Locke's account of personal identity as it appears in the text. Followed by section two which will discuss traditional interpretations of Locke's account which equate memory with consciousness. Section two will draw mainly on Thomas Reids "Gallant Officer argument. Finally, section three will reflect on the first two sections and argue why the memory criterion is wrong.
1. Locke's account
Most scholars agree that identity is an important topic for Locke because of the implications it has on his account of moral responsibility. Locke is concerned with an indi...
... middle of paper ...
... of personal identity. However, consider the following passage:
If it be possible for the same man to have a distinct incommunicable consciousness at different times, it is past doubt the same Man would at different times make different Persons. (II. xxvii. 20)
Assuming that Locke would agree with Reid's Gallant officer argument and that the school boy and officer are distinct persons then why would Locke question this possibility? Considering Locke has already admitted to the fallible nature of memory, if he truly thought personal identity consisted in the continuity of memory he would also have to admit to new persons being created every time an individual forgot an event. Again, the use of "if possible" suggests that Locke means more than just ordinary memory.
Finally, perhaps the most notable textual evidence from Locke's account of personal identity
But this would allow for three bodies to have the same identity, which cannot be the case when talking about an identity that can belong to one and only one person. Therefore, in defense of the memory theory, memory theorists like those in Perry’s work advocate for the addition of an addendum to the original theory: person A at time point A is identical to person B at time point B if and only if there is only one person at time point B who is psychologically continuous with person A. This revision eliminates the possibility of duplication examples discrediting the memory theory as a viable answer to our questions of personal
John Locke believes that A is identical with B, if and only if, A remembers the thoughts, feelings, and actions had or done by B from a first-person point of view. This shows that the important feature, memory, is linking a person from the beginning of their life to the end of their life. Locke’s memory theory would look something like this: The self changes over time, so it may seem like personal identity changes too. However, even if you are changing, you are still retaining past memories. Therefore, if you can retain memories, memories are the link between you and an earlier you, so personal identity persists over time. So, memory is the necessary and sufficient condition of personal
This essay discusses John Locke statement: “it is as insignificant to ask, whether Man’s Will be free, as to ask, whether his Sleep be Swift, or his Vertue square: Liberty being as little applicable to the Will, as swiftness of Motion is to Sleep, or squareness to Vertue.” Locke came to this conclusion while writing on the subject Of Power in An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Subsequently, I argue whether Locke is successful in establishing this parameter against the Will’s being Free. I conclude that Locke makes an inconsistent and unclear argument about this specific subject. This conclusion will be address in this essay. In order to perform this task, I will first state the argument that Locke makes. An explanation of the argument will follow after. Next, I will offer an argument that contradicts Locke’s view. Finally, I will demonstrate how Locke’s argument can be attacked, making it unstable to its previous claim.
Consciousness is seemingly always during the present and memory, a past entity. However, Locke responds to Reid and claims that one can have a memory of something without having consciousness of that memory. Reid continues to argue that identity must be something that stays exactly the same over time, however, our consciousness is in a state of constant fluctuation, thus our personal identity would be endlessly changing. Locke counters Reid, however, arguing that our consciousness is constantly changing and that we could still be very much conscious when we are sleeping. Furthermore, our personal identity is not restricted by our consciousness however, our capability to be conscious of former memories. Although Locke successfully responds to Reid’s first criticisms, Reid presents the analogy of the brave officer which highlights key contradictions that effectively subvert Locke’s account of personal
One of Locke’s statements that he discusses is that of an individual’s own person. Example, when an individual takes away something from nature through his/her hard work, it will not be considered as “common property” of all mankind no more, because it would belong ONLY to himself. For instance, If an individual picks up (fruits) under a tree, the so called fruit will automatically belong to him at the moment they were gathered, rather than at the
The psychological continuity claims that personal identity is a necessary condition for personal identity persistence. According to the psychological continuity, “A person X at t is identical with Y at t* if and only if Y is psychologically continuous with X.” According to John Locke” identity of persons, is identity of consciousness” What this means is that you can change your body entirely but still be the same person because it only consider the mind. The mind is what stays the same hence psychological continuity is a necessary condition for personal identity. Though, Locke’s argument might seem convincing it’s has a lot of fallacies. A strong objector to that argument was Reid. Reid suggested through his “brave soldier” example that Locke’s argument isn’t the basis for personal identity. First, let me point out that psychological continuity has a chain of person stages connected by episodic memory. Also, psychological continuity claims that as long as you remember now being the same person in the past, then your body right now is identical to the same person you were before. In other words, if you lose your memories, then you aren’t the same person as
Locke and Rousseau present themselves as two very distinct thinkers. They both use similar terms, but conceptualize them differently to fulfill very different purposes. As such, one ought not be surprised that the two theorists do not understand liberty in the same way. Locke discusses liberty on an individual scale, with personal freedom being guaranteed by laws and institutions created in civil society. By comparison, Rousseau’s conception portrays liberty as an affair of the entire political community, and is best captured by the notion of self-rule. The distinctions, but also the similarities between Locke and Rousseau’s conceptions can be clarified by examining the role of liberty in each theorist’s proposed state of nature and civil society, the concepts with which each theorist associates liberty, and the means of ensuring and safeguarding liberty that each theorist devises.
This paper will argue that the philosopher John Locke would have agreed that the human being Karla Faye Tucker should have been executed. I will start by examining the fundamental difference between a human being and a person as forwarded by Locke. In addition, this paper will address what identity over time or what it means to be the same person over a period of time is. I will then show that through Locke's personal opinions, he would have believed that the human being Karla Faye Tucker was the same person who committed the crime 14 years ago and is thus culpable for punishment. A strong objection to my argument however is of Hume's opinion or lack of opinion (account or lack of account) on personal identity. Hume argues that the concept of personal identity is a falsification and that our personal identity is nothing more than a collection of memories which we bundle together as memories. I will counter-argue however that "
Accordingly, all that is needed for an individual to possess and maintain his personal identity are certain mental capacitates for having conscious experiences, the examples of thoughts and sensation are given, and the ability to perform intentional actions. It this portion of the theory, a departure from the traditional Aristotelian view of substances is made. The original viewpoint of Aristotelian forms can apply only to inanimate objects, which have no personal identity, in this dualist theory, if the arguments illustrating that two people can be the same person, even if the is no continuity between the physical matter of each body are correct. Consequently, for two substances to be considered the same, in this reformed view, they
In order to form an opinion on what Locke would do in the case of the 80 year old man who has been charged with war crimes that he genuinely does not remember one has to analyse the complex definitions surrounding identities. This essay will look into Locke’s thoughts and theories and by process of elimination speculate on how Locke would have evaluated the claim. Why the necessity to fully analyse the definition of identity? Locke believed that the identity of things was not always as readily discernable as what first meets the eye and as a consequence set about defining the identity of all things from physical objects, the identity of living entities and ultimately the identity of man and the identity of person.
One of Locke’s largest points is "All ideas come from sensation or reflection” (Locke 101). He thinks that man is completely blank when they are born and that their basic senses are what gives them knowledge. Locke states, “Let us then suppose the mind to be, as we say, white paper” (Locke 101). Locke is basically saying that human nature is like a blank slate, and how men experience life in their own ways is what makes them good or evil. Overall, Locke believes that any and all knowledge is only gained through life
If an individual loses his past self, would he still be the same individual? According to the personal identity memory theory by John Locke, as long as a person is the same self, the personal identity of that person is the same. But for Leonard Shelby who is the main character if the Memento film, this does not apply after he suffered a condition that hinders him from creating new memories. This paper addresses the topic of the truth of John Locke’s perception of personal identity which follows that Leonard does not have a personal identity. The paper reviews the Memento film which is a psychological thriller which presents two different personal identities of Leonard Shelby after suffering from a memory condition. The paper
Locke and Hume both agree that memory is key to define personal identity. Locke believes that memory and consciousness define personal identity. While Hume’s thinks it is the source of personal identity, he does not fully agree with Locke and thinks that memory reveals personal identity, it does not create it. They both agree that there is a change; Locke understands that a person changes and what relates everything to who we are is
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. One more perspective on personal identity and the one I will attempt to explain and defend in this paper is that personal identity requires both physical and psychological continuity; my argument is as follows:
...tainly possessed these qualities of life even with all is idiosyncrasies Locke believed we were all created equal that this was “self-evident”. Locke’s’ reason was to abide by the laws of God as well as the government. He thought that we should be mindful of how we treat ourselves and others at all times for as long as we live. . As a result of Locke’s views, he established “New liberties that would be enshrined in civil, social, and political rights”. (Biblical Politics pg. 95) “Although Locke’s new political order left individuals free from subjection to authority and helped overcome gender and similar barriers to personal and social advancement, this order also became problematic: a new-found emphasis on reason ultimately led to a disruption in the human spirit and to new forms of social isolation”.( Biblical Politics pg. 95-96)