Leibniz's Spatio-Temporal Continuity Summary

Article Summaries
Leibniz’s Spatio-temporal Continuity: Most people agree that the spatiotemporal continuity is a good guide to determine a person’s identity, but philosophers want more. The theory says that spatiotemporally continuous stays with the body not the mind. For example if two people switch bodies like they do in Freaky Friday then they are then the mind in the daughter’s body is the daughter and the mind in the mother’s body is the mother’s.
Locke’s Psychological Continuity: According to Locke's theory you could change all the parts of a person and still be the same person. I like his example of a tree that loses a branch is still the same tree just without that branch. I think that if you entire brain was wiped clean then you
He does however think that duplication is a good idea, because even though you will not continue to exist your duplicate will.
Hume’s Bundle Theory of Self: Hume believes that we are only aware of thoughts, feelings, and perceptions. We also do not have a imprint caused by the self or a thinking substance, we go solely off what we think it should be like. According the Hume, we are a bunch of impressions. The article asks you to think about your “self,” it continues to say that you cannot complete the task.
Buddhism Theory of Self: In this theory, it states that Buddha believes that you are not a “self”but really a agglomeration of physical and mental elements. To prove the theory they use the example of if we were ever changing then we would have do past, including no birth. So the theory believes that be ever changing then you should have many births, which is a crazy thought. The article also talks about rebirth and how even though you are different you are still the same and depended on
My view on identity was that it was how people knew it was you and not someone else. My view on self has stayed the same, but my view on identity has become more complex. Now, I think that identity is how people knew it was you, but also that our identity is a made up of tons of little pieces and not just one piece.
I really enjoyed reading Locke’s theory and agree with it fully. The idea that even if all the parts are different doesn’t mean that it isn’t the same person. You can change the way it looks, but not change what it is and I think that it applies to humans as well. A tattoo changes the way you look, but doesn’t change who you are. I think that this theory could help people who have lost a limb realize that they are still the same person they were before losing the limb.
I didn’t really disagree with any of the articles or points. I thought that they all had parts that were interesting and could be valued. I think that Parfit’s theory is the most “out there” of all the theories, because I don’t foresee them being able to duplicate people anytime soon. I also think that even though they would look the same, I think that mentally they would be different because they still would be a different person. It’s like taking identical twins and thinking that they are the same