Posted at 10.09.2018
"Aiming to define yourself is like seeking to bite your own tooth" - Alan W. Personal Identity play its role concerning define human being with quality of its own which makes him or her a distinctive one. The identity of somebody who is involved must have the ability to realize them, and he must be identified by other people. In short, why is John unique from Felicia? Both inside (head) and external (body) views will be the two essential aspects which may have to be differentiated by one. There are several general philosophical theories of this identity problem.
Body theory, Heart theory and Mindful Theory will come to fit into the missing piece of the puzzle of personal id.
The body theory is one of the theories define personal identity. It could be defined as when Person A has a personal personal information if and only if they have the same body X. However, two problems are available in this description. Qualitatively, it is to own the same body, but if changes occurred to the body, can we still establish see your face as the same one? Everyone's body is certainly different if we were to compare at age 60 and 4. Another problem popped out on the problem of body alteration. If Felicia becomes wounded by a mine at war, and then her feet need to be amputated, is she not similar person, Felicia? Therefore, this is of the theory is insufficient as the same body alteration is not accounted for. Alternatively, numerically, if the person lost his finger credited to a major accident, does that finger is counted as some other body? Imagine if a scientist decided to use someone else's DNA to clone another person with the same DNA? Two different people with equivalent body surely cannot be the same person because they're still two differing people with similar body. Both of these would be living completely different lives. Hence, in defining personal identity, the body theory by itself had failed to make it valid.
The Soul theory would be the next common theory in defining personal identification. Similarly to the body theory: Person A has a personal identification if and only if they have the same soul. The idea became far more complicated when we want to define a rather controversial term - heart. In the faith aspect, it is regarded as spirit of a person that passes through one's body into another realm (eg. Heaven or hell). However, it is still a mysterious phenomenon since there is no proof that can demonstrate its existence. For example, whenever a cloud changes to grayish puffy product, we will still say, "the cloud experienced turned gray". In short, we still recognized it as a cloud. It is just many souls in a single body. Therefore, the heart theory is also not valid as it fails in that the definiens is inadequate to define personal id.
The truest and most recognized philosophy ideas about personal identification are the awareness theory. However, this theory is interpreted in a different way in 3 ways: the experiential content, mindful self, and connected stream of consciousness ideas. First on the list, the mindful self-theory: they're thought to have personal personality if they have the same self-conscious. In another words, when there is a different conscious in two different people, then both of them has personal id. At first sight, it looks like a good theory to demonstrate personal identity. It really is analogous to Descartes' cogito, "I think therefore I am. " Second of all, the consciousness of experiences theory is the common derivatives to the idea of consciousness. It really is easier known as the experiential content. This theory originates from the Locke's theory of experiencing your brain blank, and deposition from experiences. One is to get personal identity because only one person can experience at one finite space. We take twins for example. Although they have indistinguishable bodies, as soon as they were created, they are already experiencing different moments. Therefore, both of these have personal identity because they experience different surroundings and see things in another manner. The major problem is that people do not have the ability to remember each and every experience in our life consciously. For instance, one can still tell someone else what they have consumed three days back but it is impossible for a person to tell another what they ate today after 10 years. In another example, one cannot be define as having different personal personality because they were drunk and acted like another person. In other words, because the individual mind has didn't consciously remember each and every moment of these lives, this theory eventually is invalid.
The connected stream of consciousness will be the previous theory about personal identification. With its meaning of a person's identity is made out of a "stream" of linked conscious experience, this theory eventually experienced solved the condition of individual unable to remember about their experience consciously. With this theory, we it's still the same person although we are unable to remember what we have done at age 4 when we are 60 years old. Generally with a finite brain, conscious is affiliated in a chronological routine. In a nutshell, we will need the river as a metaphor. If you see a river streaming every day, you will not be looking at the same part of the river (representing body or experiences), but you'll not be able to dispute that's not a river. Hence, let say the river is personal personality. This theory almost got everything right then.
Thomas Reid which is also my preferred option to the thought of personal individuality disagreed with Locke's storage theory by reducing it to absurdity. Locke's theory was criticized for a couple irrelevancies. To begin with, I strongly trust what Reid retain. He feels that personal id should be established with something that can't be divided into parts - indivisible but not by identifying by functions. He, too, stated the main problem of Locke's is his ideas are of puzzling proves of one more thing with itself. Official paradox was launched by Reid at his attempt to Locke's theory to absurdity.
A U. S. publisher, James Baldwin once quoted, "An identification appeared like it is here incidentally whenever a person encounters and uses his experience". Assuming that we will not be able to put everything into a whole puzzle, we could still left with one choice. Pluck a rose, independent the petals one at a time which each petals symbolizes one idea. Whatever came out at the end, it is you call by your own intuition.