The primary source material for discussion of Hume's " theory" of personal identity Book I,Part IV is stated that "The identity, which we ascribe to the mind of man, is only a fictitious one, and of a like kind with that which we ascribe to vegetables and animal bodies." In this passage Hume's main argument is based on the personal identity which is a fictional that ascription of identity over time to persons is a mistake. One we all make a mistake and that is why it is explicable. Hume characterized the identity to the perceptions because there is no such a thing as personal identity that can attributed to humans. One of the important perception that Hume mentions is that relations of resemblance and causation. The relation of resemblance does not require the clarification. For this Hume states that "an image necessarily resembles its object" therefore perceptions of the same object will necessarily resemble each other. Moreover, he is also disregarding the existence of any …show more content…
According to Hume, he did not have a "theory of personal identity" and he was claiming that there is in fact of reality as "identity" which is also "personal identity". The idea of the "personal identity" he claims that fictitious a construct of the imagination as is identifying. Hume also denies that identity applies equally to living things and the self. He states that ""The identity, which we ascribe to the mind of man, is only a fictitious one, and of a like kind with that which we ascribe to vegetables and animal bodies. It cannot, therefore, have a different origin, but must proceed from a like operation of the imagination upon like objects."[Treatise, I, IV, VI]. In short, Hume's idea of the "theory of personal identity" is in fact a theory of how people make the mistake of thinking that having a personal identity because his descriptions of the mind's identification of causal relationship.