Derek Parfit argues that personal identity doesn’t matter for survival; what really matters for survival — what we really care about — is psychological connectedness and continuity. This might seem to go against common sense. It seems like I don’t just care about psychological connection and continuity between me now and a future person; it seems like I care whether that future person will be me. In your paper you will discuss Parfit’s support for the claim that identity doesn’t matter for survival, and assess his position. In particular, your paper should do four things:
1. First, very briefly state the problem of personal identity over time.
2. State why Parfit thinks that identity isn’t what we really care about. (Hint: Parfit describes scenarios where the notion of numerical identity doesn’t neatly apply. These scenarios are supposed to bring out differences between identity and what does ultimately matter for survival.)
3. Explain what Parfit thinks matters for survival: namely psychological connectedness and continuity. See especially section IV. (You may switch the order of 2 and 3, if it seems more natural to you.)
4. Assess Parfit’s position. Is Parfit right that we don’t really care about identity? Could he be more convincing? Do we actually care about identity, over-and-above psychological connectedness and continuity? If so, why? Though you are not required to do so, you might find it helpful to illustrate your assessment with a case of your own.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|