First I will introduce the topic with which I am discussing then continue to state my thesis. After, Goldie’s view will be explained in detail with an explanation of Locke’s philosophies following. Then, I will address concerns with narrative thinking in Locke and Goldie’s view. Next, counter arguments will be made including the issues of consciousness, the Matrix, and whether an individual whom is unconscious should be held accountable for their actions. Readers should suspect that I will conclude my argument with a concluding paragraph thus summarizing.
Goldie bases his philosophies off Locke’s ideas of personal identity by elaborating that we develop as a person by becoming conscious of the way we organize memories. Additionally, Goldie
…show more content…
Accordingly, possible counter arguments were produced. First, how do we know whether we are alive and conscious? Could we possibly be sleeping and thus not be alive? In passage twenty-two from “On Identity and Diversity” Locke states that when you are asleep you are not alive because there would be no conscious, as consciousness is dependent on personal state or state of mind. Goldie’s theory on narrative thinking would not have been carried out, as having a conscious would have enabled experiences which in turn would have been organized coherently. Narrative thinking can only occur when awake in order to fictionalize and bring to life internal feelings and reconsider past events. In relation to the Matrix, if we are floating in a tank while our minds are in another time, are we alive, even if we have memories thus making us a person and a body that makes us a man? Locke would say that you are the person you are in your memories, because you are made of your memories. In fact, you are the person you remember. On the other hand, if someone had become a new person or if someone was unconscious, then who should be blamed for their past actions? Locke would answer this question by referring to passage twenty-six from “On Identity and Diversity”. According to Locke, person is a forensic term which means the word can be used in terms of reward or punishment in the eyes of the court. Specifically, in court Locke encourages the use of the term person instead of man or woman. If unconscious, the individual was not a person so then there could not have been consent to have committed the crime. Specifically, the body of an individual could solely act, resulting in murder but the person did not intentionally do the deed. Locke reinstates the idea of the separation of mind and body. Goldie supports Locke by saying that to connect experiences, memories must be organized