Personal Identity Memory Theory: A Philosophical Discussion - Essay Sample

Introduction

For several years, philosophers have put much of their effort in an attempt to express personal identity. In a personal understanding essay that was written in 1690, John Locke proposed that the own identification for an individual extends as their consciousness. The connection existing between knowledge, as well as memory in the theory of Locke's, earned a title of its own. Despite criticism, the personal identity memory theory became a prominent discussion subject among modern metaphysical circles.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

What Is the Objection and Why Might It Be Considered a Problem for Locke’s Views?

Locke's objection was about the punishment of a drunkard man. He argued that an individual should not be punished for the crime he or she commits while drunk (Nimbalkar, 2011). It because wine alters the mind of individual functions hence exposing the particular individual to some of the crime, and these people never realize they are doing something wrong.

Locke's view might be considered a problem because people will take advantage of the ignorance and cause more harm to society. The fact is that some people, even though their minds remain altered depending on the level of drunkenness, some go to take alcohol aiming at something. Even before going to make it, they have a picture of what they want to do in their minds, and they get drunk to have the courage to face the real act. I think if at any means these people are not punished, they will cause severe destruction to people and even the society because they are aware that they will be considered as people who do not know anything.

Deciding to ignore such crimes cannot be right because, in several instances, people will be getting drunk to commit a crime, but punishing them for such incidences many people develop a fear in them hence minimizing the crime chances in the society. Even though an individual remains the same person when drunk as well as when sober, a punishment for the crime committed when he or she is drunk should be considered because getting drunk is a choice, and every decision has its consequences (Nimbalkar, 2011). As a result, whether drunk or not, every person should be careful not to get into trouble since it will not go unpunished regardless of the cause of the crime. Lock's view will still be considered a problem. If people can go unpunished for committing a crime due to drunkenness, then it means there is no need to implement rules and regulations to govern the society or the nation as a whole because most of them will be violated.

How Does Locke Defend His Position Against This Objection?

Until when they will be sober is when they will realize whatever they did was not right and some end up feeling sorry for the act. Since when an individual is drunk remains the same person with when he or she is sober since the individual did not commit a crime when he was not drunk, the government should not punish him or her-according to his argument, punishing a person for the wrong done when drunk is like punishing him or her for the crime that was committed when that person was asleep (Nimbalkar, 2011). When an individual is asleep or drunk, it becomes hard to distinguish what is right and what is wrong, so such crimes should not be treated as a crime. In a drunkenness situation, nobody knows what is happening, and according to Locke, no one is supposed to be questioned for the things he or she is not even aware of.

Was the Defense Is Successful?

The defense is not successful because it was encouraging the commitment of the crime. To agree with this view means to bring a stable society to a wicked one because many will just commit the crime intentionally because they know that the community will admit that they were not aware of what they were doing. Many argued against this view, saying that if a person has a differing conscience when asleep as well as while awake, then it means these are deferent people. As a result, while sleeping or awake, the conscience of an individual should not differ. In this way, this argument should also apply when a person is drunk, and when he or she is sober. I'm sure that even if alcohol alters the thinking of an individual, many of them are aware of what they do because some will also remember to wrong done to them still in that situation. It is good not to let them go unpunished to ensure society is respected.

Conclusion

Drunkenness can lead to several crimes such as suicide, involvement in unsafe sex, as well as killing someone. Crimes such as killing or sexual cases are not right in society, and to teach other people a lesson is right to punish such people. By doing this, it will reflect the seriousness of the community to various drinkers. Those who take alcohol should also be aware of the health issues this can cause in their bodies such as heart attack, high blood pressure, inflammation of pancreases, brain, stomach, or spinal cord. Some of these health issues are incurable and should be put into consideration. Drivers may also drive under alcohol influence hence causing danger to passengers.

Reference

Nimbalkar, N. (2011). John Locke on personal identity. Mens sana monographs, 9(1), 268. Retrieved 09 March 202, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3115296/