A Philosophical Debate about Personal Identity in the Modern Period - Term Paper Example

PERSONAL IDENTITY - JOHN LOCKE Locke’s concept of identity is grounded in the wholeness of experience as opposed to the discrete and rational conceptions of self that other thinkers of the enlightenment propounded. Locke deals with the question of self in its entirety and proposes a theory of the self that takes into account the fact of the individual’s existence in Toto. If we contrast this theory of the self with the one of the most famous thinkers, Descartes, who proclaimed “I Think, Therefore I am”, Locke stresses on the indivisibility of the self. For Descartes, the mere fact that man is capable of thought and thinks is proof of the existence of an identity separate from matter. He viewed mind and matter as two distinct entities and his conception of the self was grounded in the rational and objective thinking mind. On the other hand, Locke proposed that identity arises out of the wholeness of experience. As we shall see in the subsequent paragraphs, what Locke is proposing is a conception of the self that takes the position of existence as opposed to thinking as the basis of identity. Locke attempts to answer the Cartesians by pointing out that they would not include the brutes as well as having an identity because they lay emphasis on the thinking mind, and if a spirit can pervade the immaterial substance, what is it that stops Animals from having an identity for them. It is often said that we are moving away from the Cartesian dualism of Mind and Matter. This is indeed the basis of modern holistic thinking. However, it is to Locke’s credit that he saw the contradictions in the Cartesian paradigm before it became fashionable to do so. Locke perceived the self as “that conscious thinking thing which is conscious of pain and pleasure, capable of happiness and misery, and is concerned with it so far as that consciousness extends”. Hence, the self and identity are things that can look out for them and provide the basis for rewards and punishment. For Locke, consciousness is the key to identity and hence as he says, “Socrates and the current mayor of Queen Borough cannot claim to be the same person” in so far as the issue of identity is concerned. Locke’s conception of self and identity and his formulations of the theories of the same are circumscribed with his understanding of the Law and its application to the behavior of individuals. For him, punishing a man for his deeds when he is drunk is proof of the fact that the same consciousness exists in the drunken man and the sober man. So, when he says that there are phrases like “He is not himself today” or “She is beside herself”, these statements do not stand up to the scrutiny of law. Hence, for Locke, what is required is the fact that consciousness is like a flowing river and though we may not step into the same river twice, we are nonetheless accepting the fact of the river. So, with the concept of self and identity being determined by the thinking and acting spheres and the sensory perceptions, Locke drew a portrait of identity as something that is ever changing but has a fixed basis of pervading the self as well. The criticism to Locke appears when we consider the supposition that no two persons can be the same because the consciousness inherent in one person cannot be transferred to the other. In the continuity of life, what is preserved is the identity that is indivisible and hence cannot be transferred from person to person. The critique of this position is that about the notion of identity when the concept of ideas and the flow of consciousness are concerned. What this does not take into account is that the same person can be two people because of the fact that they he or she may have had the different idea yesterday and today. Thus, the position that one can only be one person all the time is thrown into question when the issue of considering the different facets of one’s life is concerned. PERSONAL IDENTITY ­­- DAVID HUME David Hume was the last of the three empiricists of the British era of the enlightenment. For Hume, Memory is the sole keeper of the identity and the ground on which the conceptions of the self have to be based. His theory of causation and perception rests solely on an individual retaining his or her memory and that which forms the basis for identity. Hume saw the process of identity as a succession of states of memory and the causation that he spoke about mentioned the effect of memory on subsequent states of identity and personality. Hume further proposed that identity is caused by a succession of ideas that are in themselves transient and subject to change. Hence, there is no conclusive word on whether the “grammatical and philosophical difficulties can be resolved” to the satisfaction of everybody. Memory does not produce identity as much as it does help in discovering oneself through a process of introspection and perception. In this case, memory can be said to lead people to explore their inner selves with a scrutiny that is far more incisive than what an independent observer can achieve. For Hume, the perception of oneself is as important as the notion of oneself. For him the conception of self flows from the perception of oneself and consequently, the identity is formed because of the way in which the notion of the self is perceived as opposed to thought through. What one perceives oneself is as important as what one thinks about him. There is an element of subjectivity involved here and hence for Hume, there are no objective bases of individuality and notion of identity. Hume believes that we believe in the concept of personal identity as that provides some anchor to hold on in the face of impermanence and the ever changing nature of the self and its relation to the world. PERSONAL IDENTITY- THOMAS REID Thomas Reid saw identity as something that is related to the existence of different states of self at different points in time. The link that binds us to the past and the future is the concept of the self as expressed in the notion of personal identity. Essentially, Thomas Reid’s concept of identity is a critique on the theories of identity that were proposed by Locke and Hume. Thomas Reid saw identity as something that cannot be divided and placed into parts. Instead it is a continuum that links the processes of the past with that of the future. Reid critiqued the theory of Hume with his emphasis on memory as being too narrow and something that cannot account for the “memory jarring” experiences that people go through. According to Reid, there can be memory lapses and a person might not remember what he or she had done at a particular moment in time as compared to the present. As I noted in the section on Hume, introspection is a process that produces results that cannot be achieved by an independent observer. At the same time, memory is a process that does not stand up to objective scrutiny. Hence, one needs to be careful when using memory as the unit of identity. Hume’s criticism of Locke is about the notion that consciousness cannot be transferred to a separate individual. Hence, two people can be the same if the consciousness can be transferred between the individuals. Reid proposes that consciousnesses may mean memory and if Hume’s position is to be taken into account, then memory and consciousness can be interchanged to mean the concept of unitary identity as proposed by his peers. As outlined in the previous sections, Reid makes reference to the notion of personality and self as being akin to that of a flowing river and hence there is no distinctness of memory and what we have is the notion of identity as being that of constantly changing and flowing perceptions from one point in time to the other. This is very much the view of the Chinese philosophers of the Tao School who saw the self very much like a flowing river. Reid takes the position of proof of identity. If a person smells something or feels something because of his sensory perceptions, it is by no means sure that another person would feel the same. As with all philosophers who expounded on the theme of identity, Reid took the position that identity cannot be objectively verified and it is something that is perceived as opposed to something that is measured. Reid expounded on what he called the concept of “personhood” wherein each individual places his or her identity in something that cannot be divided or split and this indivisibility and wholeness is what gives the person his or her sense of identity. Hence, he agrees with Hume and Locke about the existence of a separate self as distinct from other people and having a unique characteristic of their own. However, this distinctness produces scepticism of the theory of human nature as borne out by the analysis of Bishop Berkeley on the treatise of human nature that was produced by Locke and Hume. Hence, Reid attempts to go further than Locke and Hume and proposes what can be called a modern sense of the self. His conception of the uninterrupted sense of human existence is what drew many people towards Reid’s theory of identity. In this proposition, identity is like the container of our changing selves and something that holds us together when confronted with the vagaries of existence that essentially draw upon the changing nature of this world. Metaphysically, the concept of an undivided self is difficult to grasp as our memories and consequently our conceptions of the self are fleeting and subject to change. Hence, as we try and grasp to this ethereal ‘I’, we are often confronted with the fallibility of our existence and our conceptions of the self are subject to this very process of change and hence there is no iron clad thing that we call the self. Reid’s critique of the other philosophers is that there can be no fixed conceptions of the self and all experience as well as feeling are temporary in the ceaseless flow of human existence and all of us have a teleos (end point or logic) to which we all proceed in our attempts to go through the motions of life. The logic of human existence demands that our fixed birth and death are the certainties and that the life in between is a flow of thoughts, perceptions and ideas. What follows from this is scepticism of the concept of self and the attendant ideas about the fixed nature of us. Like other thinkers, he saw life as essentially a flow of consciousness and a movement from one state to another. These states begin with the fact of birth and end with the death of the individual. What fills up the intervening years are a collection of thoughts, ideas and feelings as well as perceptions that we call the self. Reid’s conception of the flow of consciousness is what makes him take on the ideas of the other thinkers when it concerns the question of a fixed or a permanent identity. According to Reid, we flow through life and are not the same at any two given points in time. This ceaseless motion and flow makes it impossible for us to have the same or the similitude of identities at all times. Hence, though Locke may have been right from the point of the Law deciding on the basis of individual actions, we cannot legitimately claim that it was the same self that did something the other day and today as well. Of course, this leads us to the dangerous conclusion that no man can be responsible for his actions. Personally, this is what I feel that Reid has not thought through and that this supposition does not fit very well with an otherwise developed sense of the identity and man’s place in the world. SUBJECTIVE ANALYSIS a) Among the three views on identity, Reid’s conception of self as something that connects the disparate parts of our composite identity is the most appealing to me. This is because: first, in this ever changing facet of our existence, something that lets us hold on to the concept of ourselves has to be embraced for its view of the fixed nature of the self in a ceaseless and changing world. Second, I believe that Locke may have been right about the importance of law in determining the reward and punishment of individuals based on their actions. However, we need to go beyond the strictures of identity and evolve a theory of the self that takes into account the vagaries of human existence with its twists and turns. Third, I believe that what Reid proposed is more in tune with our post modern world that emphases belonging to the whole world rather than a narrow sphere of belonging. However, Reid’s emphasis on “personhood” must be taken in the context of the immanent nature of the self along with something to hold on to. However, I have to admit that Reid does not come out strongly on the issue of our selves as they relate to the transitory scheme of life. He should have taken a stronger position on what exactly is that separates us from other creatures. Is it the capacity of thought? Or is it the capacity of feeling and perception of oneself? Of course, the point that we have an identity because we exist is a strong enough argument to believe in the concept of identity. b) Locke’s strongest point comes from his assertion about the law and the course of action that needs to be taken when determining culpability. This is something that abstract notions of self do not usually take into account. We live in a world where we are governed by rules and regulations and hence any theory of the self that takes into account the fact that we are liable for actions and cannot claim immunity from them is something that needs to be welcomed. Hume’s strongest point is when he talks about the causation of memory that binds us to our past and present and hence the fixed nature of our self that keeps is together. This point is certainly worth celebrating for its emphasis on the way in which he posits identity as a succession of memory states. Reid is at his best when he talks about the identity as something that connects our disparate selves and hence keeps us from collapsing under the weight of our own contradictions. All of us have contradictory impulses and it is our sense of self that keeps us from falling prey to the vicissitudes of our disparate selves that are at war with each other. c) Locke’s weakest point is when proposes the concept of distinct identity because consciousness cannot be transferred between persons. This is something of a long shot as if it can be proved otherwise; his theory would fall flat on its face. Hume’s weakest point is when he disregards the notion of reward and punishment and posits that there cannot be a conclusive conception of the self. This is a bit dangerous when we consider that we have our rights as well as duties when confronted with the fact of our life in a civilized society. Further, the notion that a man cannot be responsible for his actions is somewhat of a dangerous idea when one considers the fact that we as individuals are governed by a set of laws and are subject to some duties as individuals. Reid’s weakest point stems from the fact that he is unable to rebut the other two philosophers strongly enough. Though he is critiquing them, he defers to their ideas in some ways. Read More