Hume has valid points about impressions and that perceptions change. I feel that any growing person has a perception change. The things we go through in life changes perception. The experiences that a person had in life create the memories that Locke states that makes up personal identity. There are going to be changes physically and mentally as we grow older and go through different experiences. Does that make us a different person? I do not. It’s just one of those interruptions of consciousness that Locke states. Even though we have interruptions we do still tend to remember some part of it. For example we sleep and dream about something. Sleep is an interruption of consciousness according to Locke. Though we were sleep, we had a dream. We can remember what the dream was about. This is now a part of our memory. Though interrupted we still have hold to our personal …show more content…
Reason is a cause or explanation of an action or a logic or premise of an argument ((http://socialsciences.exeter.ac.uk/media/universityofexeter/collegeofsocialsciencesandinternationalstudies/research/conferences/Locke_and_Hume_on_persons.pdf)). I disagree with that statement. A cause or experience can in fact produce an action or emotion. For example, my mom dies. That is a cause. I feel sad and in disbelief. That is an emotion in reaction to the cause of my mom dying. That is why I chose Locke’s idea of personal identity. Although Hume had some good points in his idea of personal identity, Locke’s idea appeals more similar to my idea of personal identity. The examples he gave help me to understand his view a lot better than Hume.
Many philosophers had many ideas of what it takes to contain personal identity. Some believe that you truly don’t have a personal identity. Others think that you do. There is no known set definition or fact of having personal identity. It relies on your own understanding and creativity of the mind to believe in such a