The self is a result of what we feel in the present and the past because it is, “impossible for anyone to perceive, without perceiving what they perceive,” (Locke 2). The self is a result of the current and the past. The conscious of self is directly a result of the thinking that differentiates people. However, the author claims fault in the thinking the few moments where we do not recall past events such as when we sleep. The practicality of this theory is made real because the human being reacts from what they feel. The thoughts are produced from what the mind perceives. Since the conscious mind is a result of what the mind perceived, thoughts are determined by what the mind perceives.
The identity of a person is a result of perceptions regarding situations and people. A person always has a perception. Thus the difference in identity is the difference in perception. Impressions generate ideas which in turn generate other impressions which eventually form perceptions. Without memory of the perception, such as when asleep, the individual is not liable for the self‘s recollections of perception. Hence, memory determines the self and the liability accorded to the self (Hume).
Locke’s theory is more compelling because it relates to the physical part of the self. The practicality of development of consciousness is determined by what we perceive and then form impressions later. Hume, on the other hand, suggests that the impressions determine our impressions regarding other people or situations. Contrary to Hume’s theory, Locke’s theory suggests a change in the personality immediately after perceiving. Hume rather implies a change in perception. Though perception may determine the personality, the idea formed after an impression is from the self which is not a result of the first impression.
The opinion by the author that a person experiences a change in personality due to change in clothes is misleading (Locke). The human being is a result of an accumulation of many aspects other than the clothes. Though the clothes might affect the personality to some extent, it is not a particular determinant. Other personality aspects such as the past and sleep. A human being’s personality is arguably a result of accumulated and possibly recollected memories and experiences.
Locke fails to show the relationship between the personality change and change of clothes. The conscious feels other things aside from the visual sense. The personality is also a result of other aspects. Locke should, therefore, consider showing the dynamic personality. To follow his theory, he should show how aspects such as love and hate are determined by clothes.
Hume, David. “Of Personal Identity.” Rintintin 1 (1776): 3. Print. 10 March 2018.
Locke, John. “IDENTITY AND DIVERSITY.” Project Gutenberg 2.1 (1905): 1-28. Print (PDF). 10 March 2018. <http://www.uvm.edu/~lderosse/courses/intro/locke_essay.pdf>.