

Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
Material Type: Assignment; Professor: Warshaw; Class: Intro to Philosophy: AH3; Subject: Philosophy; University: Front Range Community College; Term: Unknown 1989;
Typology: Assignments
1 / 2
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
In most cases, it would be possible to give a response of much greater length, but for the purpose of these exercises, you should strive to craft responses that are crisp, concise, and give clear expression to your thinking about the questions and the relevant assigned readings.
You should take care not to leave out any important details that would detract from the completeness of your responses. You should address your responses to an audience of interested persons who are eager to consider the outcome of your efforts to think carefully and critically about the specific question given - and other directly related issues.
I will be looking for a clear demonstration that you have done the assigned readings. This will be made evident in responses that show that you have a working understanding of the descriptions, explanations, and/or relationships between the relevant issues, ideas, and concepts. Working out your responses to these questions in this manner ought help bring more focus and increased participation to at least some parts of our class discussions.
Your scores on these assignments will be calculated as part of the 'Quizzes/Assignments/Activities' portion of your overall course grade as described in the syllabus.
Please ask me to clarify any confusion you may have regarding any of the questions, or the feedback you will receive on these assignments.
If you fail to turn in your assignment on the date that it is due, please contact me as soon as possible.
I expect you to check this page frequently to find out when new questions have been added to the list.
I think it's safe to say that most people have an idea of the self as some kind of essential entity that continues to exist over time, that the 'my self' is that which we refer to when we use the term "I". Hume suggests what we call 'self' is better described as a bundle of perceptions ; and that to look for any particular kind of entity ( kernel, ego, etc.), that exists apart from those perceptions, is like looking for a chain apart from the links that it is made up of. Hume observed,
" ... when I enter most intimately into what I call myself, I always stumble on some particular perception or other, of heat or cold, light or shade, love or hatred, pain or pleasure. I never can catch myself at any time without a perception, and never can observe any thing but the perception. When my perceptions are removed for any time, as by sound sleep; so long am I insensible of myself, and may truly be said not to exist. And were all my perceptions removed by death, and could I neither think, nor feel, nor see, -nor love, nor hate after the dissolution of my body, I should be entirely annihilated, nor do I conceive what is farther requisite to make me a perfect non-entity. If any one, upon serious and unprejudiced reflection thinks he has a different notion of himself, I must confess I call reason no longer with him. All I can allow him is, that he may be in the right as well as 1, and that we are essentially different in this particular. He may, perhaps, perceive something simple and continued, which he calls himself; though I am certain there is no such principle in me. "
"I may venture to affirm of the rest of mankind, that they are nothing but a bundle or collection of different perceptions, which succeed each other with an inconceivable rapidity, and are in a perpetual flux and movement. Our eyes cannot turn in their sockets without varying our perceptions. Our thought is still more variable than our sight; and all our other senses and faculties contribute to this change; -nor is there any single power of the soul, which remains unalterably the same, perhaps for one moment. The mind is a kind of theatre, where several perceptions successively make their appearance; pass, re-pass, glide away, and mingle in an infinite variety of postures and situations. There is properly no simplicity in it at one time, nor identity in different; whatever natural inclination we may have to imagine that simplicity and identity. The comparison of the theatre must not mislead us. They are the successive perceptions only, that constitute the mind; nor have we the most distant notion of the place, where these scenes are represented, or of the materials, of which it is composed."
It's no small or simple task to genuinely understand Hume's description of what 'self' is, or, in keeping with his argument, to understand the reasoning behind his claim that 'the self' is not. I think our most natural tendency is to simply reject Hume's description because it denies something that most of us at least feel we cannot BE without. Rather than reject Hume's conclusion 'out of hand', please offer a description -short, sweet, and in your own words- of what Rachels calls, 'The Bundle Theory' in section 5.2 of our text. Rachels attributes the theory to David Hume in brief, and I thought it would be helpful for you to be able to read Hume's argument in his own words, which is why I've quoted him at length above. We'll have time to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of this theory in class, and see how it stacks up to the more familiar 'Soul Theory'. As I said, this is not a simple task, I'm not so sure that I really get it? -But if you make an honest effort to really understand what Hume is saying, in spite of the fact that you likely find it contrary to what you probably want to call your ' experience ', you may find yourself short of any good reasons to reject Hume's view?