Refutation against Locke’s Memory Theory of Personal Identity The philosopher John Locke in his 17th century masterpiece, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, specified that personal identity could only be determined through consciousness or memory. This means that as far as one can remember, that is only as far as his personal identity exists. Beyond his memory and consciousness, the personal identity must be a different self. However, this theory has problems when it comes to legal considerations.
Exposition
John Locke’s Memory Theory rests upon the belief that a human being is a conscious being, and that “what enables [a thinking intelligent being] to think of itself is its consciousness, which is inseparable from thinking and (it seems to me) essential to it” (Locke 1690/2007, 9). This means that as human beings determine the world and all their knowledge only through consciousness, then consciousness must be the basis of personal identity and of its permanence.
…show more content…
Locke explained the side of the courts or the present justice system. According to Locke, “the courts justly punish him, because his bad actions are proved against him, and his lack of consciousness of them can’t be proved for him” (Locke 1690/2007, 22). Nonetheless, by admitting that “his lack of consciousness…can’t be proved for him” it means that Locke’s Memory Theory lacks any practical usefulness in real life. It may actually be real or true but there is no way to prove it in objective terms, and so it is therefore practically useless. In fact, the case of Billy’s drunkenness is similar to claims of demonic possession and similar cases where it is just very unfortunate to inflict harm and pain on the person whose body is said to be used by a malevolent force. Nonetheless, since objectivity must determine the practical usefulness of a theory in human terms, there is no way that this problem can be