Psychological Bundle Theory Vs Cartesian Ego Theory
448 Words2 Pages
There are two major theories that are constantly debated about what persons are or what a personal identity is; the Cartesian Ego Theory and the Psychological Bundle Theory. The Psychological Bundle Theory was created by a man by the name of David Hume. Hume created this theory in opposition to the popular belief that there was some type of constant property in humans that represented the self. His main argument is that we have no idea of self, he supports his arguments with premises. Premise one states that ideas must begin with impressions. Premise two argues that we have no single impression. Premise three states that we confuse identity and diversity. In other words, each and every person represents a series of different states, experiences, events and thoughts occurring into succession into one another and the lives of people are unified through their experiences and later memories. For example, if one is made up of X and said to be made up of Y, then Y is not X. There is no existence of a unifying constant property if…show more content… Parfait agrees with Humes idea that we have been analyzing identity incorrectly. He is known for his discussion on a scenario that pertains to teletransportation. He discusses a device called the teletransporter, which can read a person’s material while destroying it, then transfer the information at the speed of light. The receiver reads this information creating an exact copy of your material. Parfit argues that you will die during this process; however you will have a “replica” of yourself who will pick up where you left off with your life. The replica will be someone who will be exactly similar to you, but it will not actually be you. It will have all your attributes such as your look, personality, memories. One implication of this view regards to whether the replica would be the same person as you, and hence what truly makes a person what they