You have no items in your shopping cart.
ABSTRACT
There are many things that seem cognizable at a mere glance in our cosmos but when special attention is paid to such matters they turn out to be puzzles and our judgment become hazy on such matters. Russell would ask if there is any knowledge that is indubitable that a reasonable man cannot doubt. Take for instance, a teen seen ten years ago by an uncle at age ten, when seen in the next twenty years by this same uncle of his, his uncle would remark that he has changed. What exactly changed in this child? Would it be right to treat this person as the child seen twenty years ago? Is this child the same person with this person he has now become? Is there anything that remained fixed in the midst of the obvious changes noticed in this person? What makes a person a person, is it the body or soul that makes a person? Or is it memory or consciousness that makes one a person? The argument of personal identity rests on our justification of what a person is and upon the justification of what makes a person a person? Is a person made up of an enduring self/mind or a material body that does not survive death of the body? Is it the case that what defines a person is one’s consciousness? Philosophers have tried to grasp this problem of personal identity but nevertheless, we shall conscribe our research to Hume’s view of personal identity, he sees it as inexistent and fictional.
