[ Copy this | Start New | Full Size ]

Login:
Password:
New messages · Members · Forum rules · Search · RSS · Profile · Logout
  • Page 3 of 3
  • «
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Forum moderator: I_Guy, s0dr2, El_Matador  
Forum » Knowledge » Philosophy/Science » The Concept of a Person (Do you believe that identity exists?)
The Concept of a Person
eboyd Date: Sunday, 22/Nov/09, 2:03 AM | Message # 31

Heads
Posts: 13145
Reputation: 2
Offline
Quote (ritesofpasage)
Do you believe identity exists?
- Yes

Does it exist in it's natural state away from cultural influences?
- Yes, if you have ever seen a gay toddler with straight parents that's evidence enough

How do you prove identity exists?
- If identity exists then perceptions of the same experiences can be different. Such as one baby eating ice cream and smiling another baby eating ice cream and frowning.

that doesn't negate the idea of identity simply being a brainstate. let us define identity though for just a moment:

1. the state or fact of remaining the same one or ones, as under varying aspects or conditions: The identity of the fingerprints on the gun with those on file provided evidence that he was the killer.
2. the condition of being oneself or itself, and not another: He doubted his own identity.
3. condition or character as to who a person or what a thing is: a case of mistaken identity.
4. the state or fact of being the same one as described.
5. the sense of self, providing sameness and continuity in personality over time and sometimes disturbed in mental illnesses, as schizophrenia.
6. exact likeness in nature or qualities: an identity of interests.
7. an instance or point of sameness or likeness: to mistake resemblances for identities.
8. Logic. an assertion that two terms refer to the same thing.
9. Mathematics.
a. an equation that is valid for all values of its variables.
b. Also called identity element, unit element, unity. an element in a set such that the element operating on any other element of the set leaves the second element unchanged.
c. the property of a function or map such that each element is mapped into itself.
d. the function or map itself.
10. Australian Informal. an interesting, famous, or eccentric resident, usually of long standing in a community.

i am personally referring to the bolded definition. by that, we cannot, in my opinion, define identity. think about this: you have a car that you have had for a long time and will continue to own forever because you love this car. over time, you replace every part due to wear. when you replace the headlamps, you obviously still call it your car. even when you replace the engine it is still that car. when you have replaced every single molecule of the original car, is that still the same car? i'd say yes. that happens in the body as well. by the time you are about 20 years old there isn't a single atom in your body that was there when you were born. is that still you, or are you a new person? i'm 22. i still feel like me. what, then, defines our identity?


my new theme song



erikboyd60@hotmail.com

"True poetry can communicate before it is understood"

-T.S. Eliot

battle record:

7-0-0

I_Guy Date: Sunday, 22/Nov/09, 3:25 AM | Message # 32

Heads
Posts: 1792
Reputation: 1
Offline
If we were to describe a person, how would we describe his physical identity? If we were to give him a physical description of identity, it would be impossible because at every second he would be changing physically. Even things that are not alive have no physical description of identity. A car can't have it because as the example showed, it is continuously changing (that's not to count rust and oxidation, and other microscopic changes).

If we were to describe a person, how could we describe a person's personality identity? For instance, an old man might not be the same as he was when he was a 20 year old. He may not have the same desires, drives, wishes, etc. So is he a different person? In fact he would be. The only way someone could have identity is if their composing matter never moved or changed (the subatomic particles can't even vibrate), and they would have to maintain the same desires, drives, wishes, etc. until they no longer existed. Of course this is impossible. The fact that everything is forever changing in almost every way prevents any sense of identity from existing. We might be able to say that identity is an ever developing thing (but that would kind of contradict its meaning).

Now as far as people having individuality, sure. But we have no control over it.


We all know that each of our end is near; the question is do we accept the end of our living existence, or do we accept our existence as dead men...
I_Guy Date: Sunday, 22/Nov/09, 6:21 AM | Message # 33

Heads
Posts: 1792
Reputation: 1
Offline
Speaking of identity lol.



We all know that each of our end is near; the question is do we accept the end of our living existence, or do we accept our existence as dead men...
I_Guy Date: Tuesday, 24/Nov/09, 12:48 PM | Message # 34

Heads
Posts: 1792
Reputation: 1
Offline
I was reading some work by Derek Parfit and I think he may be the leading thinker concerning identity. According to him, we need to abandon all existing conceptions of identity and start anew, because our current conceptions of identity are terribly flawed. He posits the view that the survival of our identity is on a continuum. There is a continuity from past selves to future selves and they are connected more so or less so by distance through time. So essentially we only have true identity during small slices in time. The increments of time need not be determined, but the conception of time increment is key. Through time, we actually die a little bit every increment, but we are also enlivened in the same way as we meet new increments. So basically, our identity is smeared through time.

I suppose once an entity (person) completely dies, then an identity of that entity could be construed by others still alive, but only after that entity dies. Because after they die there can be a complete record of that entity's existence, thus change to the identity has ceased, and there can then be an identity given to the dead entity. But while they are alive, they don't really have a true life identity, they rather have slices of identity as they pass through time, each slice connected to other slices in a continuous chain. By this sense we can give an entity an identity when they are dead because there is a trail that we can track back that only that one entity would have, thus providing a specific identity to that entity. It is difficult because there are multiple levels of identity beings it is on a continuum and also beings it goes against the common definition of identity.

Parfit believes that if we understand this (and a bit more not mentioned), then it helps us defeat self-interest and fear of death.


We all know that each of our end is near; the question is do we accept the end of our living existence, or do we accept our existence as dead men...
eboyd Date: Tuesday, 24/Nov/09, 1:04 PM | Message # 35

Heads
Posts: 13145
Reputation: 2
Offline
Quote (I_Guy)
I was reading some work by Derek Parfit and I think he may be the leading thinker concerning identity. According to him, we need to abandon all existing conceptions of identity and start anew, because our current conceptions of identity are terribly flawed. He posits the view that the survival of our identity is on a continuum. There is a continuity from past selves to future selves and they are connected more so or less so by distance through time. So essentially we only have true identity during small slices in time. The increments of time need not be determined, but the conception of time increment is key. Through time, we actually die a little bit every increment, but we are also enlivened in the same way as we meet new increments. So basically, our identity is smeared through time.

I suppose once an entity (person) completely dies, then an identity of that entity could be construed by others still alive, but only after that entity dies. Because after they die there can be a complete record of that entity's existence, thus change to the identity has ceased, and there can then be an identity given to the dead entity. But while they are alive, they don't really have a true life identity, they rather have slices of identity as they pass through time, each slice connected to other slices in a continuous chain. By this sense we can give an entity an identity when they are dead because there is a trail that we can track back that only that one entity would have, thus providing a specific identity to that entity. It is difficult because there are multiple levels of identity beings it is on a continuum and also beings it goes against the common definition of identity.

Parfit believes that if we understand this (and a bit more not mentioned), then it helps us defeat self-interest and fear of death.

wow, that's pretty damn interesting. idk if i can agree with what i understand of it at face value, but it is in the direction of what i understand, although a little too sci-fi-ish and possibly presumptuous. i'll have to read into this a bit more.


my new theme song



erikboyd60@hotmail.com

"True poetry can communicate before it is understood"

-T.S. Eliot

battle record:

7-0-0

I_Guy Date: Tuesday, 24/Nov/09, 1:07 PM | Message # 36

Heads
Posts: 1792
Reputation: 1
Offline
Yeah I drastically simplified it for the sake of posting but (if you are prepared to read) you can get the jist of it here http://mind.ucsd.edu/syllabi/03-04/phil1-spring/readings/parfit.pdf

We all know that each of our end is near; the question is do we accept the end of our living existence, or do we accept our existence as dead men...
Forum » Knowledge » Philosophy/Science » The Concept of a Person (Do you believe that identity exists?)
  • Page 3 of 3
  • «
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Search: