Of Identity and Diversity In XVIII century the phenomena of consciousness was put on the place of soul. These were the phenomenon which the person actually observes, finds in “himself”, turning to his “internal sincere activity “. These are ideas, desires, feelings, memoirs, known to everyone by personal experience. John Locke is considered to be the founder of such understanding who stated, that, as against soul, the phenomenon of consciousness is not something assumed, but actually given. In 17th century Locke created An essay concerning human understanding, one chapter of which was called Of Identity and Diversity, where the philosopher was considering the essence of human understanding and also the question whether a person is always the same continuing immaterial substance. Locke rejects necessity of dualism though believes, that existence of a non-material substance is rather probable.
Lock considered substances incognizable, thus having deprived metaphysics with its traditional subject and having replaced it with gnosiology and psychology. Locke writes, that the substance is something, I do not know what it is. He is considering its existence but didnt make the actual conclusion about if it really exists. For understanding of Lockes concept it is necessary to take into account the intellectual climate in which it appeared. During an epoch of setting of new European science principles (it tried to find the basis in the experience), the most susceptible to changes people have felt the need for the reconsideration of a former substantiation of the central Christian doctrines on which the western civilization was based. These were the Doctrines about the immortality of soul, revival from dead. John Lock was, undoubtedly, one of those who wanted to coordinate former religious doctrines to new principles of empirical reason.
The Term Paper on Locke on Substance
Abstract: First, I explore John Locke’s conception of substance. After, I argue that Locke’s theory of substance is necessary for his theory of identity, and therefore philosophically vital for Locke’s ethical and political theories. I consider objections to Locke, but ultimately defend Locke’s theory of substance and its primacy in Locke’s overall philosophy through a different interpretive ...
Lock provides the traditional proof of immortality of soul (the proof the other philosophers believed in) in the following kind: The material cannot think, hence, the soul is non-material. Nothing can naturally destroy a non-material thing, hence, the soul naturally is immortal. ” However this proof is unacceptable for Locke as he rejects the opinion, that “that what thinks inside of us ” is a non-material substance. Locke considers possible that the material substance also could possess ability of thinking if the God granted it with this ability. Lock wants to make the concept of the personality relevant to the fact of consciousness. Problematical character of concept the “personality”, basing on the concept of a substance, consists in that it cannot explain a phenomenon of consciousness.
The soul as a non-material substance is not given to us in experience, and the consciousness is the axiomatic fact. This circumstance has induced Lock to reject substantial theory of the person and to proclaim identity of consciousness as a necessary and sufficient condition of identity of the person in time. The substance in Locke’s understanding is a certain “doubtful” essence, something like a prop which the helpless human intellect puts under the sensations and a reflection. The intellect is not capable to think ideas perceived by it i.e. own sensations, without the carrier, therefore it considers a substance to be the carrier of these ideas, not being able however to make about a clear representation of it. Lockes substance cannot constantly think because for Locke thinking is the same that perceiving: “We authentically know from the experience, that sometimes we think, and out of here we make the true conclusion, that we have something inside that has an ability to think.
The Essay on Personal Identity Locke Man Person
In order to form an opinion on what Locke would do in the case of the 80 year old man who has been charged with war crimes that he genuinely does not remember one has to analyse the complex definitions surrounding identities. This essay will look into Locke's thoughts and theories and by process of elimination speculate on how Locke would have evaluated the claim. Why the necessity to fully ...
But we can speak with confidence about whether this substance constantly thinks whether or not, only in that measure in what we are learned from experience.” “it is easier to become invisible for others than to make seen for yourself the ideas of another which you do not see. For this purpose it is necessary to determine soul as eternally conceiving substance, and that is all. If such definition is a little convincing, I do not know, what purpose it can serve, unless will force many people to doubt, whether they have a soul because they see, that they spend a big part of their life without thinking. ” Lockes theory about a substance is a theory of a hypothetical substratum the essence of which is inaccessible to human intellect which learns both external, and inside world empirically with the help of sensation or a reflection. The substance is not essence, but a hypothetical substratum which we assume, being not capable to think how the found in mind perceptions form things. Having rejected Descartes doctrine about congenital ideas, Lock declares an experience a uniform source of all ideas.
In full conformity with substantive provisions of the philosophy Lock defines the person: as the body of corresponding shape that has feeling, movements and intellect. As the soul of the person is a board on which experience writes, the philosopher comes to the conclusion about the omnipotence of education. Whether, the same immaterial substance remaining, there can be two persons. As to the second part of the question, whether the same immaterial substance remaining, there may be two distinct persons; which question seems to me to be built on this,- Whether the same immaterial being, being conscious of the action of its past duration, may be wholly stripped of all the consciousness of its past existence, and lose it beyond the power of ever retrieving it again: and so as it were beginning a new account from a new period, have a consciousness that cannot reach beyond this new state. All those who hold pre-existence are evidently of this mind; since they allow the soul to have no remaining consciousness of what it did in that pre-existent state, either wholly separate from body, or informing any other body; and if they should not, it is plain experience would be against them. The education is obtained by means of intellect. Though Locke speaks about weakness and limitation of our intellect, he gives it a high assessment. The reason has two mental abilities: an insight (i.e.
The Essay on Descartes And Locke Simple Ideas
DESCARTES AND LOCKE (Knowledge) One of the most important branches in philosophy, is Epistemology, which means, theory of knowledge. So far, philosophers have made many attempts to discover the source of knowledge, the standards or criteria by which we can judge the reliability of knowledge. We tend to be satisfied with think what we know about almost everything, even though sometimes we are ...
ability to find the ideas, allowing the establishing of relations between researched ideas) and the logical deducing. When the intellect operates in unity with sensations there is nothing so dark, so latent, so inaccessible to any sensual perception than what the intellect could not comprehend by thinking. Despite of such optimistic statements Locke shows the skeptical attitude towards the decision of concrete theoretical and logical problems. So, when the question about the world appears, we should take into account, that distinction between primary and secondary qualities and the belonging of the general to the intellect, instead of the validity makes the conformity of our knowledge to the world problematic. The contents of the basic concepts by means of which we try to understand the world around are not clear in many respects. So, John Locke didnt reject the existence of the immaterial substance, he assumed it.
However he didnt know what it is. Assuming the existence of the substance, he was considering it as existing and he was doing it in different way in comparison with his contemporaries. He didnt accept the idea that the person is born with the knowledge that this immaterial substance has, but the knowledge is gained by means of experience. As for me, I do not completely agree with John Locke. The conception that our souls know everything and when they come inside the bodies they forget their knowledge and our task is to recollect, still exists. I sooner believe it.
Of course, experience is very important, but some people have the outstanding abilities by nature and this fact disproves the Lockes theory. Bibliography John Locke An essay concerning human understanding (Book II, Chapter XXVII. Of Identity and Diversity).
The Essay on Locke And Decartes Ideas Come From Experience
In comparing the argument for the existence of God there are two views, Decartes and Locke. Decartes believes there is innate knowledge that everybody already has a perfect being acquired knowledge. Locke believes that all ideas come from experience. I believe truth lies between both of these theories. "It only remains for me to examine how I received this idea from God. For I did not acquire it ...
