The three talk about basic issues related to the logical problem of evil, such as whether any theodicy renders it possible although not necessarily plausible that God and evil coexist, whether divine omniscience and human freedom are compatible, and how atheists can make sense of good and evil. And, I presume, if she was able to keep her old body, W says she would not hesitate to have a rejuvenated brain to replace her original brain.
For instance, a bachelor is defined as "an unmarried male. Would you take comfort in this?
It is a new part of the game; nevertheless it is still the same game. Souls in principle cannot be seen or sensed in any way; that is, by their very nature they are inaccessible from the outside. The dialogue is lively and entertaining. Matthews perfects the BJ process so that the copying process is just as reliable as Perrys dialogue goes on when memories are preserved in the original brain.
For example, let us say that a brain copy is possible, and that my brain is exactly copied with all the memories it contains.
If you accept the idea that Perry is challenging, you might find this reading unsettling. Who she is now turns on not just her states of mind and their relation to my states of mind, but on the existence or nonexistence of other people. If we found that the water of a certain river was of a decidedly different quality, or it suddenly had entirely different fish, or our fishing hole was no longer there, etc.
The conclusion seems inescapable to C: A Dialogue on Personal Identity and Immortality. But how, she wonders, does this help Miller prove that survival after death is possible?
W argues that it must be a question of fact because whether or not one is correct to anticipate survival to anticipate having the sensations and thoughts of the survivor is an objective question of fact, not convention.
As Hume puts it, any chain of reasoning more than three steps long can be ignored, so I became a philosopher and have been happy ever since. More than theorizing, this text expresses ways of defending ideas and proving them to be true or more-likely-to-be-true than other ideas.
She begins by raising doubts whether the memories of the survivor of a brain transplant are real or merely apparent. The different stretches of it are connected by other stretches to form the whole river.
W criticizes the Cartesian theory on epistemological grounds: That is, since rivers run, there will always be different waters flowing through the same river over time.
The shy smile of somebody recognizing a neighbor, the warm smile of somebody greeting a good friend, and the sadness of somebody that misses someone special are all reactions that are brought about by memories. People perform these tasks without thinking about them.
I cannot, for example, see or sense that your soul is here--indeed, souls are just the sort of thing that one cannot see or sense! Sam sees no problem here Why should she suffer a mild stomach ache for the sake of someone else? Qualitative Identity Weirob is first careful to make the distinction between numerical identity and qualitative identity in the dialogue, Perry calls the former "identity" and the latter "exact similarity".
Your soul or mind is responsible for your psychological characteristics, e. There are conscious and subconscious memories.
Indeed, as Descartes has shown us in the Meditations, we can Perrys dialogue our eyes and introspect, and we can come to the conclusion that we exist without having to assume anything about having bodies at all.
See her example about whether or not she should take an aspirin before the operation. But if your soul which is immaterial is intimately related to but not identical with your body, then the death and rotting away of your body does not result in the death of your soul.A Dialogue on Personal Identity and Immortality (Hackett Philosophical Dialogues) [John Perry] on mint-body.com *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers.
Perry's excellent dialogue makes a complicated topic stimulating and accessible without any sacrifice of scholarly accuracy or thoroughness. Professionals will appreciate the work's command of the issues and depth of argument/5(30).
A Dialogue on Personal Identity and Immortality This is a record of conversations of Gretchen Weirob, a teacher of philosophy at a small Midwestern college, and two of her friends.
John Perry was born in Lincoln, Nebraska on January 16, Perry's book A Dialogue on Personal Identity and Immortality deals with standard problems in the theory of personal identity in the form of a dialogue between a mortally wounded university professor. John Perry, A Dialogue on Personal Identity and Immortality (not “Immorality”!) Gretchen Weirob (philosophy teacher, atheist, materialist, empiricist).
Perry's Dialogue on Personal Identity Essay. Sam Miller holds the theory that “same body is correlated with same soul” and claims that “the two are intimately related but not identical” (Perry, ). Perry, John R. The Henry Waldgrave Stuart Professor of Philosophy Stanford University Education: B.A., Doane College, The Perrys spent six years in Soto as resident fellows, an experience he calls "one of the most unexpected, most meaningful things in my university career." This dialogue differs from our other readings in this unit.Download