John Locke vs David Hume on personal identity?
I know that John Locke states that personal identity is based off memory, for example, prince and cobbler. But, there is a flaw in his argument with the Brave officer paradox. Hume states that there is no criterion for personal identity, but I don't exactly understand his evidence or how he supports his argument. Could anyone help me understand what his argument is and his claims? Also, a problem with Hume's argument is that because there is no connection between memories then that means that we are technically not the same person, in that case would that mean we could not arrest criminals?
- 8 years agoFavorite Answer
Hume defines identity as a continuum, not just as a set of attributes and actions separate from one another, as did Locke (based on memory). (1,2)
A more up to date, kind of phenomenology of self-identity depends on the emergence/appearance of self to self, and self to others.
Those accused of crimes, are done so because of leaving a trace of their identity (at the phenomenological and attribute/genes/etc) in the circumstances wherein the crime was committed. (3)
In the same way one has evidence of their self as dependent on memory, one's own source of evidence of their identity.Source(s): 1. http://web.mnstate.edu/gracyk/courses/web%20publis... 2. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC311529... 3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence
- fuscaLv 44 years ago
I do not keep in mind exactly where it is, but look for Hume's remarks on the "philosophical relation" he calls identification. It is earlier in the Treatise than the argument about private identity. Anyway, in the event you learn that part, you in finding Hume questioning how we can understand that a factor is the identical thing from one moment to one more. This is an instance. I continually have a couple of of the same form of pen on my desk. Think i am writing with one of them, i'm going get a cup of espresso and return to my desk. How am i able to be specific that one pen is the one I used to be utilising earlier than? Hume says that the only option to be aware of is that if i have a steady and lasting impact of the pen however I lose simple task once my affect in interrupted. Now, for individual identification. Remember that Descartes argued we've got a soul or intellect that lasts in the course of our lives (and beyond). It stays the identical; it's the factor that ensures i'm the same individual from yr-to-12 months. But Hume "appears" for that soul. He can not become aware of it and so he concludes it does now not exist. In fact, after I seem upon my possess mind I in finding handiest bits and pieces of my experiences related to each other. NONE is connected to a few CARTESIAN mind OR SOUL THAT STAYS THE identical during MY existence. Now, of course, I particularly do think that i am the identical person from delivery to loss of life, however I seem totally unable to prove it. There may be nothing i will in finding that stays the identical about me continually. That's the hindrance of individual identity.