Memory Theory of Personal Identity Term Paper

Split-brain Cases as treated by Bundle Theorists

Bundle Theory, as seen above, holds that the unit of consciousness can be explained not as a single individual person but rather as a series of states and events within the mental world of each person. Every aspect of personhood is thus integrated, and cannot be separated from each other. Personality theories are particularly interesting when applied to cases such as split-brain patients.

In split-brain patients, there is no dominant hemisphere, with only the sub-dominant halves remaining. In these cases, there is no connection between the two halves of the brain, each perceiving the world according to its own field of perception. Bundle theorists then argue for the integration of the variety of experiences in a unified person, although these experiences are diverse.

The theory can then be likened to a person having several diverse experiences at the same time, which is the case for most persons going through life at any particular time. In the case of a split-brain patient, several states of awareness of several different experiences occur, according to bundle theorists. There is no third, separate entity as might be assumed by memory and ego theorists. The entire experience occurs within the person, and the person remains an individual, although the experiences and awarenesses within the same person are diverse and numerous.

Evaluation

Memory theorists are essentially attempting to separate the personal identity from everything else, including morality and experience. Identity is assumed to be made up of a number of essentially physical parts that remain the same in essence throughout life. This has been shown by study and experience to be incorrect. There are many variables within the individual, even in terms of physical properties. As Hume points out, growth occurs both in the personality and the physiology of a person. The fact that the identity does not change is explained by the gradual process of growth. This may then also be what led to Locke's memory theory that separates the physical aspect from all other experiences of humanity.

Locke's theory is however not very effective in terms of personal identity, because it is so easy to disprove. Human beings are integrate parts forming a whole within themselves and as part of a community. To separate any of the parts from each other is to deny the very nature of humanity. Hume on the other hand assumes both integration and a dynamic process of experiences in terms of the identity and personality.

According to personality and identity theories today, Hume's bundle theory is therefore the superior of the two. Everything in life is integrated, including the various aspects that form the human identity. Life is indeed a dynamic process of growth and identity change and formation. The gradual nature of this process ensures that the same identity remains throughout life. Thus, while Locke was on the right track assuming that the identity remains the same, he was incorrect in assuming that it is entirely static.

Personal identity is made up of many parts, as Locke states, but each part is dynamic, as Hume states. Human beings are thus the sum of their experiences, but not separate from them, as memory theorists hold. Experiences serve as a process human beings go through in order to change and grow. This process serves as the vehicle to the final end, which is death.

Thus through changing experiences and perceptions, the human being grows not only in physiology but also in personality to reach maturity. When old age is reached, wisdom is achieved, which could then again form part of the experiences and perceptions of the offspring, thus affecting future generations. In this way then personal identity continues to change and grow, affecting the evolution of the community and humanity as a whole.

Third, evaluate which (if either) is the better theory of personal identity.