1 / 17

PARFIT

PARFIT. WHO THINKS THAT THERE IS NO SELF?. Derek Parfit (born 1942). Split Brain Argument. [Split Brains: A Primer]. Michael Gazzaniga’s (b1939) findings…. The Social Brain (Gazzaniga1987). Gazzaniga does new research on the split- brain patients of his (teacher and ? ) colleague

ebony
Download Presentation

PARFIT

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PARFIT WHO THINKS THAT THERE IS NO SELF?

  2. Derek Parfit (born 1942)

  3. Split Brain Argument

  4. [Split Brains: A Primer] Michael Gazzaniga’s (b1939) findings…

  5. The Social Brain (Gazzaniga1987) Gazzaniga does new research on the split- brain patients of his (teacher and ? ) colleague Roger Sperry Nobel 1981 (1913 – 1994)

  6. Rodolfo Llinas Columbian Neurosurgeon Philosopher of mind Book: The I of the Vortex

  7. Split Brain

  8. Split Brain

  9. Split Brain Argument (373) Premise 1. Surgical separation of brain lobes yields 2 streams of consciousness. Premise 2. There are three possibilities: 2, 1, or 0 persons. Parfit to argues for 0 person theory.

  10. Person Theory Two Person Theories [Parfit does not consider all theories]: Ego (Cartesian)  Bundle (Hume) = no self Parfit argues for Bundle theory: a no self/ego/person theory.

  11. Buddha [Parfit’s argumentam ad verecundiam?] Buddha says Self is “only a conventional name given to a set of elements.” Analogue: carriage. [Cf. computer, plant, animal] Parfit: “Most of us therefore…have false beliefs about ourselves.” (375)

  12. Teletransportation Arguments Point: to reveal our false beliefs. (375-7) Case: original brain and body destroyed, and perfect replica made. Range: different proportions of cells in brain and body replaced. Variant: original is not destroyed, and replica still made.

  13. Teletransportation Arguments ARGUMENT (375-6): [cf: Lycan’s “Henrietta”] i) Variant case shows result of 100% replacement is not you. ii) If only 1% of cells replaced, then the result is you. iii) Assume result either is you or is not. [identity is all-or-none] iv) It is “implausible” that a precise percentage maintains identity. SO: There is no such thing as personal identity.

  14. Club Analogy Argument (376) Personal identity is like [is analogous to] club identity. But: there are no criteria for club identity. SO: there are no criteria for personal identity

  15. Parfit’s take on teletransportation “You do not merely want there to be psychological continuity between you and some future person. You want to be this future person. On the bundle theory there is no such special further fact…judged from the standpoint of your natural beliefs, even ordinary survival is about as bad as teletransportation.”

  16. Parfit’s Reflections “Ordinary survival is about as bad as being destroyed and having a replica.” (377) Parfit’s Solution/Theory (377-8): Unification of streams of consciousness is real, but ego is not.

More Related