Locke: Of Identity And Diversity

Locke Of individuality And DiversityI bequeath begin by analyzing John Lockes theory of psycheal individuality. Locke describes mortal-to- mortal identity in his chapter Of identity operator and Diversity, where he differentiates identity into different components until he creates a more global account of identity. Locke begins by explaining how Each individual atom is the same at a time, and stays the same over time.1It is in his first some lines that Locke stresses that identity for atoms depends on their continued identical existence over time. He then makes it clear that the most important part of identity of an organism is the continuation of the same nerve. However, Lockes problem is in deciding if corporeal or psychological continuity was more important. It is clear that Locke rejects the idea that the identity of the benevolent body is a needful part of the identity of a person. Locke proves this stoppage using his exercising of the soul of a prince in the body of a cobbler For should the soul of a prince, carrying with it the understanding of the princes olden life, enter and affirm the body of a cobbler, as soon as deserted by his own soul, everyone sees he would be the same person with the prince, accountable simply for the princes make outions however who would say it was the same composition?2In this example Locke maneuvers that the benevolent body is not necessary in personalized identity since you could have the same person in two different bodies. Since the physical body postnot maintain personal identity, Locke comes to the conclusion that it must be the psychological aspect of humanity that retains personal identity.1It is at this point that the emphasis of identity is placed on the psychological rather than the physical aspect of life as stated in Lockes second book This may extract us wherein personal identity lie ins not in the identity of substance, but in the identity of consciousness3 Lockes next point wa s to differentiate amid a man and a person. He habituates the example of a rational lecture parrot and compares it to an organism with the same shape as a human organism though it is unable to engage in rational discourse.1 This sop up experiment is used by Locke to demonstrate that rationality is not an inseparable part of a man. Since rational discourse was not a necessary part of man. Locke expressed identity using something else. thereof, Locke fin all toldy narrowed downhearted the integral part of personal identity to consciousness. Lockes translation of conscious is as follows Consciousness is both a necessary and a sufficient fit for a morally vital sense of personal identity.3 Locke describes the essence of ego as being their consciousness, which he states as something divulgeable for every opinion thing. This consciousness is described as the sameness of a rational being. The odd attribute of consciousness is that allows it to retain personal identity is that it can be extended backwards to any foregone action or thought. It is this characteristic that Locke uses to explain his theory of personal identity. 4Locke also disagrees with the Cartesian view of the soul, which held that a mans soul was of an entirely different essence than his body, focusing more on the connectedness of the same conscious thought. Therefore, Locke reaches the conclusion that personal identity can only be achieved through psychological continuity. As a turn out of this, psychological continuity relies only on the beings ability to consciously look back on their previous existence and be able to distinguish between conscious thought and memory. This distinction is extremely important to because Locke is oft ambiguous when dealing with both basis. When he refers to conscious memory, he implies that it represents the consciousness of a past experience. Conscious thought, on the other hand, involves perceiving that one perceives. Locke explains that when we re sult anything, we are always conscious of it. Psychological continuity, as Locke describes it, also insinuates that a person who exists at one time is indistinguishable with a person who exists at a second time only if the first person remembers some past experience that connects the second person to the second time. Therefore, Lockes definition of personal identity centers around the continuity of the consciousness, which is able to relate past and present memories and retain some sense of self awareness.Now that I have explained and given an analysis of Lockes theory of personal identity, I will now evaluate the validity of Lockes theory by proving that his account of personal identity is incorrect. Lockes arguments contain flaws from their conception. I have a great difficulty with Lockes statement of self-conscious awareness as the main constituent of personal identity since intrinsically that consciousness is available only to each unequalled self. Due to this dilemma, third p arty juries will be subject to shift in many cases. In order to further explain this point, I will divide my argument into two questions what does personal identity consist of and how can one tell a person is the same? number 1, since Locke be personal identity as a persons consciousness, I will use that as my basis for this argument. Thus, since we can only tell a person through their physical aspect, it becomes impossible to distinguish if someone elses consciousness resides in the person you are looking at. An example would be if a person robbed a bank but wasnt conscious of the fact that he performed the act in the first place. According to Locke, the man should be free of all charges since he wasnt the same person who robbed the bank. This however is preposterous if in a courtroom there is evidence of that person robbing the bank, the only exception being if the person could prove they lost consciousness throughout the event. Another defect found within Lockes argument cent ers around the fact that even though a person can switch bodies, it is the consciousness that determines the identity of the bodies. Thus it is clear that while Lockes statements seem perfectly rational in theory, a great deal though, they have no weight. Another flaw found in Lockes argument, is in how he leaves out particular cases where his theory of psychological continuity cannot apply. First however, I must define the distinction between person and man. Locke defines man as a living body of some particular shape. A person, on the other hand, is an intelligent thinking being that can greet itself as itself the same thinking thing in different propagation and places.4An example of this would be humans who remain in vegetative conditions and show no mental faculties whatsoever. According to Lockes description of personal identity these human beings are not considered persons since nothing can be discovered from their past in order for that individual to define their psychologi cal identity. Lockes argument between man and person becomes too controversial since the definition of both terms can never truly be settled. In conclusion, after providing examples to claim Lockes argument that personal identity originates from psychological continuity it is clear that Lockes view on identity is too flawed to be correct when shaping identity for each person.1William, Uzgalis. John Locke The Immateriality of the Soul and Personal individuality (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http//plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke/supplement.html (accessed October 13, 2010).2Locke, John. Of Identity and Diversity. In Essay Concerning Human judgment Volume Two. 1690. Reprint, Toronto Dover Publications, 2005. 517-518.3John, Locke. Of Identity and Diversity. In Essay Concerning Human soul Volume Two. 1690. Reprint, Toronto Dover Publications, 2005. 514.4John, Locke. Of Identity and Diversity. In Essay Concerning Human savvy Volume Two. 1690. Reprint, Toronto Dover Publications, 2005. 515.sBibliographyUzgalis, William. John Locke The Immateriality of the Soul and Personal Identity (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http//plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke/supplement.html (accessed October 13, 2010).Locke, John. Of Identity and Diversity. In Essay Concerning Human understand Volume Two. 1690. Reprint, Toronto Dover Publications, 2005. 517-518.Locke, John. Of Identity and Diversity. In Essay Concerning Human thought Volume Two. 1690. Reprint, Toronto Dover Publications, 2005. 514.Locke, John. Of Identity and Diversity. In Essay Concerning Human intellect Volume Two. 1690. Reprint, Toronto Dover Publications, 2005. 515.