I need help understanding the following passage:
“Could we suppose two distinct
incommunicable consciousnesses acting in the same body, the one constantly by day, the other by night; and, on
the other side, the same consciousness, acting by intervals, in two distinct bodies?” (399) If we go by Locke’s
definition, it is clear that in the first case the day and night man would indeed be two distinct persons, as different
from one another as Socrates and Plato. And in the second case, there would be one person in two bodies just
as it would be the same person wearing two different sets of clothing. Locke notes that this being the same
distinct consciousness is in no way dependent on it residing in the same immaterial substance, as personal identity
would be determined by consciousness whether or not it were annexed to such a substance. “For, granting that
the thinking substance in man must be necessarily supposed immaterial, it is evident that [that] immaterial thinking
thing may sometimes part with its past consciousness and be restored to it again….Make these intervals of
memory and forgetfulness to take their turns regularly by day and night and you have two persons with the same
immaterial spirit, as much as in the former instance of two persons with the same body” (399). Anything a
substance has thought or done that a person cannot recollect through consciousness does not belong to that
person any more than the thoughts or actions of another person altogether.
First of all, take all the words you do not fully under stand and look them up in a good dictionary. That makes it far easier to understand. We do not DO the work for you but HELP after you make an honest effort.
Sra
The passage you provided is from John Locke's writings, specifically from his essay "An Essay Concerning Human Understanding." In this passage, Locke explores the concept of personal identity, particularly in relation to consciousness.
To understand the passage better, it is important to break it down and analyze its main points:
1. Locke presents a hypothetical scenario where there are two distinct consciousnesses (or minds) that inhabit the same body. One consciousness operates during the day, while the other operates during the night.
2. According to Locke, based on his definition of personal identity, the day and night person would be considered two distinct individuals, just like Socrates and Plato. Their different consciousnesses separate them in terms of personal identity.
3. In another hypothetical scenario, Locke suggests that the same consciousness could alternate and occupy two different bodies during certain intervals. In this case, Locke argues that it would still be considered one person, similar to someone wearing different sets of clothing. Personal identity, in this context, is determined by consciousness, not the physical body.
4. Locke emphasizes that personal identity does not necessarily depend on the consciousness residing in an immaterial substance. He suggests that an immaterial thinking thing (a consciousness) can part with its past memories and regain them again. Thus, personal identity is determined by consciousness, regardless of whether it is connected to an immaterial substance or not.
5. Locke concludes that anything a person cannot recollect through consciousness, regardless of whether it is thoughts or actions, does not belong to that person. To him, personal identity is based on what one is aware of through consciousness.
In summary, Locke's main points in this passage revolve around the idea that personal identity is primarily determined by consciousness. Whether multiple consciousnesses exist in one body or a single consciousness occupies different bodies, personal identity is tied to what one is consciously aware of. Anything beyond one's conscious recollection does not belong to their personal identity.