This essay proposes to explain the principles regarding Locke's 'Theory of the Self'

The view of the 'self' and the theory of personal identity are one of the most interesting topics in the world of philosophy. It attempts to answer the question as to what makes the person now the same person that existed a year (or any period of time) ago. The world is constantly evolving and becoming more technologically proficient; one's identity is becoming more difficult to define. John Locke, an early modern philosopher, is credited as being the first philosopher to attempt to find the one constant that makes each person the same, from day to day or decade to decade. This essay proposes to explain the principles regarding Locke's 'Theory of the Self', examine the constant that makes each person the same over a period of time and assess its validity by examining a few arguments against his theory.

In An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, John Locke attempts to answer the problem of personal identity. He draws a distinction between being the same man and being the same person. Locke claims that the two are not the same; he regards man as being the physical body and person as being the mind. Also, he asserts that anything concerning man can be applied to other organisms, such as animals or plants. However, personal identity is a unique phenomenon to only human beings. Locke believes that a person can be defined as "a thinking intelligent being, that has reason and reflection, and can consider itself as itself, the same thinking thing, in different times and places; which it does only by that consciousness which is inseparable from thinking, and, as it seems to me, essential to it" (Baird & Kaufmann, 211). According to Locke, being able to reason and being self-aware are properties that a person possesses. When we think, we are conscious of ourselves thinking and Locke claims that this consciousness that we possess is what provides us with the concept of the self. The consciousness of ourselves thinking is what makes us unique from someone else. However, a problem arises; how does one exhibit that I am the same self now as I was a day ago? How can I prove that my consciousness of thinking now and then are linked?

This is a preview of the whole essay

Locke believes that the constant by which one can establish a personal identity is by continuity of consciousness. If I am able to remember being conscious a day ago, then there is a continuity of consciousness that links prior memories to the present and thus, I am the same person. My personal identity extends as far back as I can extend my consciousness. I remember being myself on my tenth birthday and have maintained my identity throughout the years, therefore, I am the same person as I was then. “For, it being the same consciousness that makes a man be himself to himself, personal indentity depends on that only, whether it be annexed solely to one individual substance, or can be continued in a succession of several substances” (Baird & Kaufmann, 212). Thus, memory is the constant that makes each person the same over a period of time. Locke then proceeds to show that the continuity of consciousness, which creates personal identity, does not depend upon any substance. According to Locke, an animal does not depend on its parts, but rather on being the same life. Locke opposes the Aristotelian definition of man as a rational being. Here, Locke provides an example of a parrot. Although a parrot is rational, it is not a man. Parrots and men are both rational, but he concludes that it is having a certain form and figure that makes the man. Hence, being the same person (through consciousness) does not depend on having the same substances.

At the outset, Locke's argument appears to be groundbreaking; it eliminates problems that other theories regarding personal identity fail to elucidate. Firstly, Locke's theory allows for change in a person as well as allowing s/he to still be the same person. The decisive factor of memory allows the properties of people to change and, mutually, maintain the same personal identity. For example, my body, personality and mindset have changed since my tenth birthday, yet others do not reach the conclusion that I am a different person. Secondly, Locke's philosophy opposes the claim that the soul is the source of personal identity. He does not disprove the existence of the soul, but merely averts it from being a necessary component for one's personal identity. Locke's basic assumption seems flawless; if I can remember that I did something, then it must have been me who performed that action. Although these lines of reasoning aid in showing the validity of Locke's theory, arguments against his philosophy do exist.

One problem that arises regarding Locke’s constant for personal identity is that memory is fallible; it has many flaws. If personal identity is based on memory, then does it follow that if I do not remember everything that happened to me, I am not the same person? I recall my tenth birthday very easily but fail to have memories of my ninth birthday. Does this mean that my ninth birthday never occurred and that I am a different person? If I am not able to remember something, how can I be sure that it was I? Based on the hypothesis developed by Locke, he would be forced to agree. Yet, arguments against this criticism exist. For example, I can remember an incident in my life that occurred a day ago and, a day ago, I was able to remember an incident that occurred a week ago, and so forth. Supporters of Locke’s theory claim that these links between events is what allows myself to maintain my personal identity. Hence, I am not required to remember every detailed incident that occurred in my life. I do not remember what I ate for lunch last Tuesday, however, I am certain that I must have eaten something. Thus, I am able to remain the same person.

Another argument against Locke’s theory is the beliefs held by Hindus, a religion that is over five thousand years old. They believe that not only is consciousness constantly changing, but that it doesn’t really exist as a stable and real continuous entity; it is considered just an illusion. Hinduism would claim Locke’s constant as continuity of consciousness to be erroneous because their belief system rejects the idea of a personal identity. They believe that everyone has evolved from the same god and that anything contemplated as being personal to someone is an obstacle in their path to become “one” with their god. I, notwithstanding, am not convinced that views held by Hindus are legitimate. They are based on beliefs that cannot be examined and answers to questions pertaining to their belief system would be obscure and would be “begging the question”.

An even more fundamental problem with Locke’s constant of continuity of consciousness is that it assumes that thinking regularly coexists with an awareness of thinking. It seems that the terms “thinking” and “awareness of thinking” have two unique meanings. For example, I can perform a mathematical equation. I may be performing operations on numbers, yet I may not be aware that I am thinking. This suggests that thinking does not necessarily entail an awareness of thinking. There are countless, familiar tasks that we perform that are not required for us to be aware that we are thinking, such as crossing the street, chewing our food or typing this essay. Since this argument attacks the principles of Locke’s theory, it disproves his belief that thinking always entails an awareness of thinking. These examples may be defended by arguing that our subconscious is responsible for thinking, even though we may not be aware that we are. However, John Locke fails to mention the idea of a subconscious. In his absence to examine the continuity of consciousness in our subconscious, Locke fails to answer questions such as ‘What happens when we go to sleep’?

As stated earlier, Locke is credited as being the first philosopher to attempt to find the one constant that makes each person the same, from day to day or decade to decade. He believes that continuity of consciousness is this constant and holds that without memories, it would be impossible for one to think and act. Locke’s ‘Theory of the Self’ fails to address such issues such as the subconscious and assumes that thinking regularly coexists with an awareness of thinking, which was proved to be false. Therefore, I believe that Locke’s theory of the continuity of consciousness and the attempt to convince me that I am the same person throughout my life, unfortunately, is nothing more than an innovative effort.