John Locke’s Theory of Personal Identity

The problem of personal identification is very intuitive, but it is difficult to define. Essentially, what makes you, you. John Locke is a philosopher trying to answer this question. He proposed a psychology theory that defines an individual's identity. There are several advantages to his theory, but this is not a correct definition of an individual's identity, as there are several counterproducts that can not be explained. My argument will prove that Rock's personal identity theory is incorrect. Locke's theory thinks that A and B are the same, only if B remembers what B did at T 2 or what he had experienced at T 1.

First, we analyze John Locke's personal identity theory. Locke explained his personal identity in the "identity and diversity" chapter. He divided it into various elements until he created a more general identity. Locke first explained, "All atoms are the same, and it is the same over time." In his first few lines, Locke emphasized that the identity of atoms will continue to exist over time. Then he revealed that the most important part of the organism's identity is "continuation of the same life". However, the difficulty of locking is to judge whether physical continuity or psychological continuity is important. It is clear that Rock refuses to believe that the identity of the human body is an important part of human identity. Rock used the example of his prince's soul to a shoe store to prove this:

John Locke (August 29, 1704, October 28, 1632) was one of the philosophers against the Cartesian theory and the soul explained his personal identity. Chapter 27 of "identity and diversity" of the article on human understanding (Locke, 1689/1997) is considered as one of the first contemporary conscious concepts of self self-repeating self-identification given to him by Rock It is. Please explain the identity and personal identity in the second edition of this article. Locke considers personal identity to be a problem of psychological continuity. Nobel believes Augustine is initially guilty and believes Descartes's position is essentially to know basic logical propositions. Source