.....it follows that he who took the standard is NOT the same person who was made a general. — Stoycho
I think you say this because the one who took the standard remembers the flogging and the one who was made a general does not remember it. So the standard-taker and the bemedalled-general have different items in their consciousness. So they are (by Locke's theory) different people. Is that how you are arguing? — Cuthbert
So, I think, that such contradiction as "the general is, and at the same time is not, the same person with him who was flogged at school" cannot be made. — Stoycho
(1) Person A is the same as person B.
(2) If Locke's theory is right, person A is not the same as person B.
By modus tollens: Locke's theory is not right. — Cuthbert
It is also possible that while not being conscious of being flogged while made general, he may be conscious of being flogged at some later time.I would like to focus on the premises that the brave officer on the one hand was conscious of his having been flogged, when he took the standard, and on the other hand he had absolutely lost the consciousness of his flogging, when made a general. And I would like also to focus on the part of Mr. Reid's conclusion "that he who took the standard is the same person who was made a general". — Stoycho
But if (1) is not an established fact...... — Stoycho
I am once again unfortunate, for it is not so obvious to me yet, but I am trying...... we can see immediately that it makes no sense — Cuthbert
into Mr. Locke's sentence that made me suddenly see the notion of "sameness of a rational being" from a different angle. Precisely to look at personal identity as personal. I was watching the contents of the consciousness of the "soldier" and that of the "general" and was wondering how we claim them same person, when those contents are different. What I failed to see is that Mr. Locke's theory allows the general, from his point of view, to identify himself with that person who took the standard, regardless of the contents of that person's consciousness.[my] — Cuthbert
And if you can spot stuff I've forgotten about then you can judge me to be a different person. First or third person perspective - it's all the same. — Cuthbert
I suspect you might be making Reid's point for him — Cuthbert
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/identity-time/ - dense article, see the bit about Ship of Theseus — Cuthbert
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.