According to Locke, there are two different substances. One is God, which is infinite, and the other is of finite intelligence. Atoms are individuated by their composition without regarding to organization. For vegetables, animals, and machines, identity consist of the continuity of their body organization. Locke believes that a man is an animal and is thus diff

Reid’s objection is found in his example of the Gallant Officer paradox. According to Reid, a young boy steals from an orchard and is flogged. As a young man, he becomes a soldier and is captured by an enemy. Then he is promoted to an officer. The young man remembers being the boy, thus the young man is the same as the boy. As the young man ages, he becomes the old man. Now this old man remembers being the young man, thus he is the same person as the young man. However, he doesn’t remember being flogged, thus is not the same person as the young boy. The fallacy is that if A = B, and B = C, then A = C. Using Locke’s hypothesis, because there is a discontinuity in the memory of the old man, he is not the same person as the young boy, thus A should equal C. This just does not make logical sense.

erent from other objects. The man is differentiated by his own continuous consciousness. Thus it is a man’s consciousness, not substance that is his identity. To prove that one has a continuous consciousness is one’s memories. Memories show that we exist. If you can remember being a child, then you are the same person as that child. Identity is based on consciousness, which is proven through memory.

Even if there is a gap between memories, can a person still be the same? If a person has amnesia, the person forgets who he or she is. Locke would argue that the person is different. There is a gap between memories, thus the person would have a new consciousness and therefore be a different person. Locke did believe that a person is an intelligent being, thus is capable of learning. The person could relearn who he or she used to be. He could relearn who he was, all through the memories. Now the person could be the same person, for he has the same memories and experiences, and thus is the same person.

Another problem with the idea that consciousness is based on memory is circular reasoning. An example of such circular reasoning is the definition a cup. A cup is a cup; this is obvious. This is circular, because I used the same term to explain the same term. The only way to explain a cup is to say, that a cup is a container that holds liquid. This example does not use the same term twice. The memory theory has a hidden circularity. Butler states:

Although this revised theory does deal with the circularity of the memory, the argument is incoherent. Suppose that I, at time t, have a quasi-memory of the experience of signing the Declaration of Independence. This quasi-memory is caused by John Hancock’s experience of signing the Declaration of Independence. This quasi-memory does not make me the same person as John Hancock just because I have the false-memory. The quasi-memory is just not enough to sufficiently uphold memory.

Some topics in this essay:
College Fred, Timmy Timmy, According Armstrong’s, According Locke, Using Locke’s, Jesus Locke’s, , Fred Fred, Quasi-memory Shoemaker, Identity Diversity, continuous consciousness, person person, personal identity, locke’s definition, using locke’s, little finger, person personality, using locke’s definition, person multiple, cup cup, identify person, person multiple personalities, multiple personalities person, person using locke’s, gap memories person,