Derek Parfit and yearning for personal identity (we do not exist, but really want to)

The article critically represents Derek Parfit’s view on personal identity and its connection with our bodies. During the discussion with animalists who claim that persons are identical with bodies Parfit defends Lockean view and concludes that person isn’t identical with human being and easily c...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: U. V. Dobronravova
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Omsk State Technical University, Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education 2020-12-01
Series:Омский научный вестник: Серия "Общество. История. Современность"
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.omgtu.ru/general_information/media_omgtu/journal_of_omsk_research_journal/files/arhiv/2020/%D0%A2.%205,%20%E2%84%96%204%20(%D0%9E%D0%98%D0%A1)/75-81%20%D0%94%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%20%D0%A3.%20%D0%92..pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1832574012444639232
author U. V. Dobronravova
author_facet U. V. Dobronravova
author_sort U. V. Dobronravova
collection DOAJ
description The article critically represents Derek Parfit’s view on personal identity and its connection with our bodies. During the discussion with animalists who claim that persons are identical with bodies Parfit defends Lockean view and concludes that person isn’t identical with human being and easily can exist beyond it. Yet it seems obvious that person isn’t identical with body, such views lead to the controversial effects. For example, Parfit claims that abortion or euthanasia wouldn’t be a crime. This article discusses some of the most debatable basics of Parfit’s position and suggests at least three points worth of next thinking. At first, the author highlights that the so-called psychological criterion of personal identity is rather conventional. At second, the real experience of personal life doesn’t match with the famous Lockean definition, because we have no any continuity. At third, D. Parfit doesn’t explain what it means to be an animal (or human animal). If there is some biological «base» of a person (head, cerebrum, or part of a cerebrum), it still stays an animal. In the conclusion of the article the author suggests that we are not human beings, nor persons. But it doesn’t mean that we can’t become them
format Article
id doaj-art-04d9a5a45bda47daba1a9de1cd85aa60
institution Kabale University
issn 2542-0488
2541-7983
language English
publishDate 2020-12-01
publisher Omsk State Technical University, Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education
record_format Article
series Омский научный вестник: Серия "Общество. История. Современность"
spelling doaj-art-04d9a5a45bda47daba1a9de1cd85aa602025-02-02T01:25:48ZengOmsk State Technical University, Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher EducationОмский научный вестник: Серия "Общество. История. Современность"2542-04882541-79832020-12-0154758110.25206/2542-0488-2020-5-4-75-81Derek Parfit and yearning for personal identity (we do not exist, but really want to)U. V. Dobronravova0Omsk Tank-Automotive Engineering InstituteThe article critically represents Derek Parfit’s view on personal identity and its connection with our bodies. During the discussion with animalists who claim that persons are identical with bodies Parfit defends Lockean view and concludes that person isn’t identical with human being and easily can exist beyond it. Yet it seems obvious that person isn’t identical with body, such views lead to the controversial effects. For example, Parfit claims that abortion or euthanasia wouldn’t be a crime. This article discusses some of the most debatable basics of Parfit’s position and suggests at least three points worth of next thinking. At first, the author highlights that the so-called psychological criterion of personal identity is rather conventional. At second, the real experience of personal life doesn’t match with the famous Lockean definition, because we have no any continuity. At third, D. Parfit doesn’t explain what it means to be an animal (or human animal). If there is some biological «base» of a person (head, cerebrum, or part of a cerebrum), it still stays an animal. In the conclusion of the article the author suggests that we are not human beings, nor persons. But it doesn’t mean that we can’t become themhttps://www.omgtu.ru/general_information/media_omgtu/journal_of_omsk_research_journal/files/arhiv/2020/%D0%A2.%205,%20%E2%84%96%204%20(%D0%9E%D0%98%D0%A1)/75-81%20%D0%94%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%20%D0%A3.%20%D0%92..pdfpersonalityidentityhuman beinghuman animallockeanismanimalism
spellingShingle U. V. Dobronravova
Derek Parfit and yearning for personal identity (we do not exist, but really want to)
Омский научный вестник: Серия "Общество. История. Современность"
personality
identity
human being
human animal
lockeanism
animalism
title Derek Parfit and yearning for personal identity (we do not exist, but really want to)
title_full Derek Parfit and yearning for personal identity (we do not exist, but really want to)
title_fullStr Derek Parfit and yearning for personal identity (we do not exist, but really want to)
title_full_unstemmed Derek Parfit and yearning for personal identity (we do not exist, but really want to)
title_short Derek Parfit and yearning for personal identity (we do not exist, but really want to)
title_sort derek parfit and yearning for personal identity we do not exist but really want to
topic personality
identity
human being
human animal
lockeanism
animalism
url https://www.omgtu.ru/general_information/media_omgtu/journal_of_omsk_research_journal/files/arhiv/2020/%D0%A2.%205,%20%E2%84%96%204%20(%D0%9E%D0%98%D0%A1)/75-81%20%D0%94%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%20%D0%A3.%20%D0%92..pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT uvdobronravova derekparfitandyearningforpersonalidentitywedonotexistbutreallywantto