One thought experiment which has been much discussed in recent years, and which does not fall into the teletransporter category of thought experiments, is that of the fission or division of persons. But it would be unwarranted to infer from the existence of such abuses that thought experiments can never perform any useful function in discussions of personal identity (see Thought experiments). Some philosophers have tried to gain mileage from thought experiments in the absence of such general agreement – for example, the case of teletransportation discussed above. There is such general agreement about the counterexamples to the body and brain criteria. Why is their use in discussions of personal identity singled out for criticism? Second, and more important, thought experiments can be useful in understanding the structure of a concept and the relative importance of its different strands, provided that there is general agreement about the best description of the thought-experiment. For one thing, such criticisms ignore the frequent and legitimate use of thought experiments in virtually all traditional areas of philosophy (for example, in theories of knowledge and in ethics). These criticisms are, I think, misplaced. It has been claimed that we should not take our intuitions about thought experiments as guides to philosophical truth, since such intuitions may be prejudiced and unreliable. The method of thought experiments in personal identity has recently been subject to criticism. As we have seen, much work in personal identity has made use of various thought experiments or imaginary scenarios.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |