In my mind, a person or individual is who they are because of how they think. But take someone who has amnesia. Some people who have amnesia experience personality changes. To me, this proves that memories and experiences help make us who we are. If a person has amnesia, then he may end up no longer being the same person he was before. But it%26#039;s clear that there was a previous self that was a different person. When you think about someone existing, without the thoughts and memories he had before, isn%26#039;t that just the same as saying the person he was no longer exists?
Let%26#039;s take it further. Say you clone yourself. Would you consider you and that clone to be the same person if you had the same memories? Would you be the same person because you both think the same way and have the same personality? Common sense would seem to say that although you and the clone both have the potential to become someone different, at that moment both you and the clone are the same. Does that mean you%26#039;re both the same existence at that point? Somehow I think that you are, even if you are physically separate. The reason why is because of my real question below.
If I have a thought, I know that it%26#039;s me that%26#039;s having that thought. At this point I know that I exist. Well what about the %26#039;me%26#039; a moment ago that had a different thought? A moment ago I knew I existed as well, but I had a different thought in my mind. Am I or am I not in a different state of existence than I was a moment ago? Does that mean that there was a different me that existed a moment ago, but now no longer exists because I%26#039;ve had a new thought? It%26#039;s difficult for me to consider, because I know that even when I%26#039;m not saying in my mind that %26quot;I am thinking this,%26quot; that I%26#039;m still having thoughts. That in itself must mean that there is still an existence. So what connects the points in which you are actually aware that you are thinking? I feel like you change every time you gain something new, new information, knowledge, or memories. Every time you acquire something new, you%26#039;re different than what you were before. Can you really say that you are not a completely different existence every time you acquire a new thought? That somehow, you%26#039;re dying constantly and someone new is taking your place each time?|||There are several problems with your reasoning... I%26#039;m not even going to get into the validity of it all.
..Let%26#039;s begin with the 2nd paragraph simply on facts.
People who experience amnesia don%26#039;t go through personality changes per-say. People with amnesia instead, show their true character. The reason being they have no memories that would otherwise make them cautious as to how they act. A person who has amnesia, is the exact same person, but with no memories. How they act while those memories are gone shows the very core of their nature. Which has a tendency to be either selfish or humble in most cases. People who were fed up with their state of life , for example, tend to go through an apparent radical change, but in actuality, in forgetting the %26quot;masks%26quot; they put on in order to get along with people and keep relationships , they are simply showing who they are really.
Now, ignoring that cloning is impossible to do with lasting results, That clone would not become you. That you are correct on, however your reasoning for it is off. Although cloning is somewhat possible, transferring memories is not under any circumstance. In essence, a clone of you at this exact moment would result in an aged body with a baby%26#039;s mind. The only way this would work would be if you had just been born and had a twin brother. (Now twins never have the same personalities now do they....)
Now, assuming a clone came built in with language and understanding and all the memories you had up to that point, then, because he has your body, he would have the exact athletic abilities as you and even the same mannerisms, but because he is his own person, would develop different interests and thus develop new skills the very moment he steps in a place you are not currently standing.
Now your last paragraph flat out doesn%26#039;t even make any sence and you know it. Did you or did you not just rip that out of your butt as you typed. If you tell this to someone, I%26#039;m willing to place good money that you aren%26#039;t truly thinking when you say it, but rather saying whatever comes to mind.
In conclusion, you are thinking abstractly and as result to doing so constantly, have thought your very existence to be abstract.
The major flaw in this whole paper is your very first premise.
A person is not a person based on what they think. A person is a person based on what they do.|||No, no, no. I wasn%26#039;t grading it like a paper. lol.
I was just pointing out where things fall apart in the whole thing... I probably could have done better in wording it.
It is an interesting concept, I%26#039;m just pointing out it doesn%26#039;t make sense. On the clone, all the clones memories would be a lie.
Report Abuse
|||I just thought about this last night really.I understand completely and wholeheartedly agree, memories are crucial for continuous consciousness of who you are.|||wow thats an amazing idea. i think about all this sort of crazy stuff. i dont know the answer though|||If this interests you then you should really read some psychology books and it will go very in depth about all this. I am studying psychology in school and it is very interesting but I am unable to answer this for I have not taken it very long.|||Even then, what aspects make up your %26#039;personality%26#039; are not memories inclusively, but feelings (genetic, by the way). Amnesia wipes out memory not replicable genetic character developments.
What do you define as a personality? Thinking abstractly and attempting to answer abstract questions (which I might say, are not objective). I see speculation, unsupported.
