On 5/14/2014 9:51 PM, Dennis Ochei wrote:
But then the identity relationship is no longer transitive...
Suppose a brave officer to have been flogged when a boy at school, for robbing an
orchard, to have taken a standard from the enemy in his first campaign, and to have been
made a general in advanced life: Suppose also, which must be admitted to be possible,
that when he took the standard, he was conscious of his having been flogged at school,
and that when made a general he was conscious of his taking the standard, but had
absolutely lost the consciousness of his flogging.
These things being supposed, it follows, from Mr LOCKE’S doctrine, that he who was
flogged at school is the same person who took the standard, and that he who took the
standard is the same person who was made a general. Whence it follows, if there be any
truth in logic, that the general is the same person with him who was flogged at school.
But the general’s consciousness does not reach so far back as his flogging, therefore,
according to Mr LOCKE’S doctrine, he is not the person who was flogged. There- fore the
general is, and at the same time is not the same person with him who was flogged at a
school.
Hence the common sense theory that person's are defined by bodily continuity.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
