Parfit's Bundle Theory

In “Divided Minds and the Nature of Persons,” Derek Parfit purposes that we as humans should separate what we consider identity and survival. Parfit’s strongest argument towards his claims is that there is no continual existence of the definite ego or personal identity. He supports some of his beliefs by contrasting Egos Theory to the Bundle Theory, a theory suggesting that our minds are a collection of none cohesive properties, related only by our consciousness and resemblance, with the studies of imaginary patients who may suffer from disorders known as split-brain cases. In this paper, I will argue that Derek Parfit’s validations for the support of the Bundle Theory should be questioned by their theoretical nature with no possible way to

The two resulting people live quite separate lives. This imagined case shows that personal identity is not what matters.” (57, Parfit) In other words, if you were to separate someone’s mind into two halves neither person would be you, this is where I disagree with Parfit. I like that he addresses the technical issue of Wiggins’s imagined case to be impossible in the next paragraph, but he doesn’t add any research towards a way to validate the case or its claims. Why could this possibly work? How does he know for sure that the replication of ourselves wouldn’t make the same choices? I personally know of a similar study that was preformed with twins who were separated at very young ages and they were raised in two different households. Though Wiggins’ case can never be completely recreated, we can try to mimic some of the theoretical aspect of the case, like if you were to have a similar person would they make the same decisions when living their

In the study one of my favorite pairs is James Arthur Springer and James Edward Lewis, who were adopted as one-month-olds. Their names being chosen by the families as pure coincidence. When attending the research study they found they were both married and divorced from a woman named Linda and both had sons whom one named James Alan and the other named James Allan. They also both remarried a woman named Betty. They both owned family dogs which were named Toy. Their favorite school subject had been math, their least favorite spelling, and both had the ability and interests in mechanical drawing and carpentry. With these interest in mind they both sought out jobs in law-enforcement training. Both brothers smoked and drank and would get headaches at the same time of day. I believe the University of Minnesota’s study disproves Parfit’s theory that we would not be the same person if you were to split our minds into two, because many would consider our sibling to be the closest people in relation to ourselves. Twins are often accused of being considered the same person even though they have their own identities. In the case study I presented, twins are as close to Wiggins imaginary patient that we can mimic. These being people who are very similar and are known for their separate identities. Many times when you raise twins