Blog

What story can you tell that helps people understand who you are?

It’d a hard question, after all there are so many. There are stories my parents tolled me of events I don’t remember at all. And if I have no recollections of them are they still my stories to tell. Another thing to think about was that article we had to read for class. If I remember  correctly it went something like this. Our first memory of events is the best one. And if we retell those events too much we add details that weren’t there before or ever. These cute little stories that my parents have tolled my about my self seem the same but how do I know they too haven’t changed a thing or two with out any knowledge of doing so. I want to same that my stories/memories are me but are they really. Are they really me or are they just something I have made up or added to.

Blog Prompt 22: What are anguish and Despair in existentialism? Discuss Sartre’s marriage example and give your an analogous example that demonstrates his point.

“Existence Precedes essence.”

     Sarter’s -I n a being that existence before he has any meaning.

                  – just end up being in the world

                  – there is no meaning to life that is given and not earned

                  – We my have not had a choice to live, however have a choice if we stay alive of kill one self off.

Things aren’t as simple as christians and communist may think or have idea of.

Sarter – thinks we have no reason to believe in god, because we understand how things work. The idea that religious belief were there to cover everything we could not explain but once we could we would move on from it to greater ideas. Greater ideas being that people came from monkeys rather gods creation.  According to Sarter’s we see the world threw our eyes and so we see it differently from those around us. Our important things may not be of any importance to others. Our focus is on our self being the subject and everything else is just being apart of that world. He also thinks that there is a inter – subjectivity meaning – we need others to know where we stand. Like we will not know we are well of if there is no one around us who is less off. We would not have that negativity if there was no one there to share it with. In not share it with maybe just to compare with, to see once again the difference between the two. We fail to see the importance if other peoples views and their effect on us. This could apply to us wanting to fit in and having to change what we wear as the mall do. We seem to want to fallow and not lead, we are rather mere sheep than wolves who’s job is to sell us useless items. Even if you are not making a choice, you are making a choice. The choice you are making by not making one is your are making a choice not to make it. Anguish because you didn’t kill your self you and you alone are responsible for your life and the lives you affect along the way as you live.  Despair the idea of not knowing what is good for you before trying it out. After all you don’t know what the ending of this could be if you, your self are yet to start it. Inventing Values, there is no one there to tell you what is of value to you. The different from values comes from the difference from background we all have. Our background varies so do our values, so do our goals and dreams in life. Existentialism give you a different meaning from that the belief of god dose. It also tells you to in away great your own meaning of life, or creating a new way to look at life for those who don’t belief in god.

It seems like a very EMO way of looking at the world, but then again I have my beliefs that are much more positive and less grim. My beliefs give me a much more positive out look on life where choices are made and are made for a reason. That reason being of my want to be in a better place. I like to believe that I want this better place more than I want the world I live in now. But then again if this was true why am I so in love with things. I love items and stuff more than I love this power being that in my belief created me. Why am I so living in the now when as a christian I should be looking for the future.  My choices aren’t very thought out either after all I think about the now and not the latter. The latter that I know is going to be good if I make good choices now.  And if I don’t make those good choices I will not end up in a better place. Knowing that in my heart I still seem to think more of that now rather than the letter.

Blog Prompt 21: What does it mean to be a person, according to Frankfurt? Explain the order of desires, and how they are related to freedom of will.

Hard determinism –  is the view that first determinism is true and second, this shows that freedom is an illusion.

1- whatever happens is determined by prior events (Dereminism)

2- I act freely only is I’m able to act otherwise (Avoribility Condition)

3- If my actions determined, I’m unable to act otherwise

Two kinds of Determinism

Hard Determinism – rules out free will, so our experience of free will is an illusion

Soft Determinism -will and determinism are compatible with each other so

“In is my view that one essential difference between persons and other ctreatures

non -effective – something you want to do but don’t

effective that very something that you don’t want to do

will – effective something that will actually happen

He wants to do something but there are some negatives attached to it that will eventually prevent him from it

“free to want what he wants to want”

two desire but witch is better and witch will you pick.

Effective – is the one you use ur actions

non effective is something you want but you will not fallow threw with

Second order desire

                     (having the actual choice is not freedom)

Frankfurt’s view is one that gives us two types of wants. Like I want to not to my homework, however I far pray to that want I will fail a class. The other want I have is one where I pass a class and passing a class means I have to do all my work to at least hang in there. He uses animals as an example saying they can not hold up like we humans had, however even we humans sometimes fail to stand we fall pry to drugs. Drugs is another thing he mentions that just because a person cant seem to kick that, dose not mean he or she is any less of a person.

I have two people very close to me who are addicted to two different things however they go about it just about the same way. My mother is addicted to eating, it never ends with her. Its not that I have a problem with her eat, well in a way I do when it starts to effect her health so much. It effects her heal so much that she is starting to look like those people on that show called “My 400lb life.” My fear isn’t that we are going to run out of food but rather we are going to run out of mothers. Running out of a mother wouldn’t be hard thing to do after all a doctor on that TV talks about it all the time. And she is starting to get this purple hanging thing on her stomach. To us it is a worry but she seem to be blind to her flaws.

My mother is blind in her flaws but she can clearly see my fathers. My father is an alcoholic, has been all my life. I cant say when he started because I don’t believe I was even born then. My flaws mother likes to point out his drinking problem and how it is effecting his life. But she fails to see that she too has a problem.

In Frankfurt’s view my parents have a had time with finding that other thing that is more important. They fail to see that their now actings are going to effect them later in life. Or that inner voice that prevents you from doing something stupid is one that is pretty much dead with in them. If it is not dead with in them maybe it was just there. And if it was never there than are they just animals. If that is to be true wouldn’t that make me an animal, it would clearly explain my failure to do my work on time. Or is there a third option where life happens and I just cant seen to keep up with it.

Blog Prompt 20: Some philosophers assert that one of the consequences of the argument against free will is that we are not responsible for our actions. Would Hume agree?

determinism -cause and effect

Hume is all about cause and effect that even the little things that happen to us happen because some action is taking. Unlike that theory that even if I do something that outcome is going to be what it was meant to be. With Hume everything happens because of actions that have been taking place before it. And according to his idea if the actions weren’t taking than that event wouldn’t have happened. An example of that is out fast food buys. We are making that action because we are hungry or due to those great big billboards. Our act of eating is in it self not some we chose to have but rather one that were are in a way talked into.

We may have that same type of good at home but there is something much more net about not eating at home. This is not an original idea but rather one that works for us. The people that sell it to us have thought it all out like eating there means not cleaning at home. It also means you don’t have to stand waiting for it too cook. Fast food has all its passes covered  and why shouldn’t they have had years to perfect it. It is so perfect that all that fast food we have as bad as it is for us we seem to becoming right back to it.

This can also apply to betting of things, we all have done it and lost but we seem to come back for more. We like to think we are smarter than any idea out there. That unlike the 100 of other people betting of the same game it is we and or our team that will come out on top. This too has been built prof like fast good over the years there is more things to put your money on. We fail to see that with putting our money in we also maybe putting our mental state in as well. We like to think we will win knowing that there are others that could as well. What Hume is noting that we can’t win without playing or that we have to eat so we do. We just don’t see that sometimes what we do has ben effected by others.

Blog Prompt 19: What is causal determinism? Would you feel any differently about your life in general—and your actions, thoughts, and feelings, in particular—if determinism were true? Why or why not?

I would be a little butt hurt, after all I like to think I can change the outcome of events. That go with the flow person just isn’t me I am a total control freak. And if events that are meant to happen just do when why do I question my actions or even consider what to do. Should I just let things go with the flow and like the current of life just take it on its way. Having said that, the part of me the very large part believes in god. Also believes in the bible witch in it self helps me make the right choice. But if I am to believe that things are already set in place and I have no say so why then do I think of my actions and not just let them go. However there are parts in the bible that do say that god knows the outcome of my actions. Which too makes me question if he knows the out come than why dose he let things fall where they do. Why dose he not stop me or prevent me from doing something stupid? Am I to learn from my own my mistakes, and if they are my own mistakes than it is I who has the will to make them. Which turns me back to I was meant to make them for some reason, whatever that reason may of may not be.

Predetermination is a hard idea to grasp after all I know that I have a will. I have a choices that I have made. However if the choices I have made are not due to my own will I am not at fault for their out come. And if I am not at fault for them why do I still feel bad about the actions I have made. Or the people that were hurt due to my actions, actions that were meant to happen to no fault of my own. But am I so important to be able to effect others so greatly of is it all meant to happen with or without my actions.

Blog Prompt 18: Choose a passage from the McIntyre reading that describes a particular aspect of persons as the subject of a narrative. Quote the passage, explain it, and tell a specific, personal, life experience that illustrates its significance with respect to identity (your identity).

Davie Hume   – Personal Identity
Our self – succession of impressions
                ideas
                memories
According to him if we are those 3 things than are we no there when we sleep and have no thoughts. Or will be be gone forever after our death?”
“For  Hume, the self is simply an illusion or a fiction.” this is not a view Westerns would agree with however in the Eastern part of the world it is one some have
mind = theater – “where several perceptions successively make their appearance”
mind is a – succession of perceptions only
personal identity – bounds between perception
Hume – a person’s consciousness, not whether he is the same person over time.
            an observation about experiences and then move to a consideration about the unity of consciousness.
memory’s  employment of two principles
                                              resemblance -“memory not only discovers the identity, but also contributes to its production, by producing the relation of resemblance among the perceptions”
                                              causation – “memory does not so much produce as discover personal identity, by shewing us the relation of cause and effect among our different perceptions.”
“Hume attributes our sense of personal identity to memory.”
 But self or person is not any one impression, but that to which our several impressions and ideas are suppos’d to have a reference. “
“For my part, when I enter most intimately into what I call myself, I always stumble on some particular perception or other, of hear or cold, light or shade, love or hatred, pain or pleasure. “
“But serving aside some metaphysicians of this kind, I may mature to affirm of the rest of man kind, 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. “

“As to causation; we may observe, that the true idea of the human mind, is to consider it as a system of different perceptions or different existences, which are link’d together by the relation of cause and effect, and mutually  produced, destroy, influence, and modify each other. ”

Weds: Class cancelled (Prof is ill) —         Blog Prompt 16:

Hume believes that the self is an illusion or a fiction. What is his argument? Do you find it convincing? Why or why not?

Hume believes that self is a self is an illusion or a fiction because they are just emotions and events that happen to us. Those events that happen to us are what shapes who we are having said that it means that if they wouldn’t have happened we our self would be different people. His argument dose hold some true to it after all it is what we as a society like to blame our life problems on. We are like Hume when we blame some for having more than we do or judging those who were born in to a live we wish we had. We fail to notice that it all could be achieved if we spend less time talking about how life is unfair and more working out butts off. Hume never used that example exactly but that is what he is getting at, in his view we are our events and that is that. It is as if he falls to acknowledge that just because we share the same events dose not mean those events effect us the same way. My brother and I share the same parents but he is more of a smarty pants than me. To prove him wrong we can look at twins, it is a known fact that even identical twins have different ways of thinking. Twins are a great example because children of the same age are raised the same. Yet the two have very different personalities tho they are raised in the same exact house with the same exact parents.  I do believe there is something more to it than that, like maybe this is something that dose not come with an explanation. After all even those that come with an explanation don’t apply to every case.
ll

Blog Prompt 15: According to Descartes, how do we know the mind is separate from the body? Do you agree? Explain. What does Descartes identify as the possible sources of his ideas? Which category does his idea of perfection fit into? What source would you identify for your own idea of perfection?

Meditation III. Of God: that He exists.

  • Considering my own nature   – a more familiar acquaintanceship with myself

I am a thing  – thinks

doubts

affirms

denies

knows few things

ignorant of many

[that loves, that hates]

wills

desires

imagines and perceives;

” I call perceptions and imaginations, inasmuch only as they are modes of thought, certainly reside [and are met with] in me.”

” But there was yet another thing which I affirmed, and which, owing to the habit which I had formed of believing it, I thought I perceived very clearly, although in truth I did not perceive it at all, to wit, that there were objects outside of me from which these ideas proceeded, and to which they were entirely similar. ”

We seem to believe that our knowledge is ours and ours alone. We fail to notice that it will can be false and come from other sources like our parents or events which have effected us. If not effected us may have some in contact with us.

Even adding little numbers and coming up with the same answer can be looked at as perhaps a deception. According to him there is still the question of where dose that knowledge coming from and if it, it self of any value.

“eason for following them in what regards truth and error.” – meaning if there was a falsehood found in this thinking we will never again think go it as true once again

impulses – there are things out of our control that make us think and conceder what is doing on – it is they that make us come up with our own conclusion  (which in it self is not is not really our own.)

Questions is anything really exists (?)

sufficient – should be found objectively

formal existence – causes for those ideas

  • ideas are merely copies of ideas which are perfect in them self

The idea that there could be a God is an idea that the author thinks already lives with in him, have that not been the case he would have now inclination of such knowledge.

Do ideas come from objects if so the effects of them are merely a “resettlement”

Week 11 (March 27-30)

Mon/Tues

Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy

Read Meditation III. Of God: that He exists, pages 12-16

Blog Prompt 15:

According to Descartes, how do we know the mind is separate from the body? Do you agree? Explain.

What does Descartes identify as the possible sources of his ideas? Which category does his idea of perfection fit into? What source would you identify for your own idea of perfection?

According to Descartes we are all a product of our environment, that is seen in his example of how he connects his views of that of a person who comes from an religious environment. He calls his prior knowledge that of a falsehood because it was give to him rather than found. It was one he, him self could now question nor answer. When knowledge comes from a source you than find to be not as solid you start to question everything that came from it. That can be feel in children who grow up thinking their parent are supper smart. Than discover that their parent isn’t as smart as they once thought. He him self thinks he is a thing that thinks, doubts, affirms, denies , knows few things, ignorant of many, that loves, that hates, Imagines and perceives. These are all things he said about him self in the article but to but more specific it is the “knows few things” witch is the one that connects to this of falsehood. The reason I believe after reading this article that mind is separate from the body to Descartes is that he thinks as hims self as a thing also than names a rock as a thing. But the differences between the two is one can think and have thoughts another just lays there. Possible source for his idea is that idea that we are thoughts come from other places like parents for example. Very few of us ever question their way of thinking and make the connection to how we our self think. There is no perfection, after all he him self admits that he is not always right, nor is he always wrong.

My own idea of perfection can be connected to my families. After all my mother and I seem to like the same type of man. She liked taller males and I too do enjoy that. My father isn’t so different from his father after all my mother has some similar facial features to that on my grandmother. My grandma on my fathers side, that too can be connected to the fact that we are the products of our environment.

Blog Prompt 13: Descartes finally arrives at something he takes to be known with absolute certainty. What is it? How does he claim to know it? Do you think he has proven anything?

Meditation On The First Philosophy  

 In Which The Existence Of God

And The Distinction Between Mind 

 And Body Are Demonstrated 

Notes “Meditation I. Of the things which may be brought the sphere of the doubtful.”

  • false beliefs (admitted as true)
  • doubtful – basis

Build a “new foundation”

“But inasmuch as reason already persuade me that ought no less carefully to withhold my assent from matters which are not entirely certain and indubitable than from those which appear to me manifestly to be false, if I am able to find in each one some reason to doubt, this will suffice to justify my rejecting the whole.” 

Senses – can deceive 

               however there is a possibility that somethings are there and can not be argued with because they are there 

Sleep = less probable 

          = deceived 

but = there are indication that can rather help with distinction between sleep and actual events

“Purely fictitious and absolutely false” – is art that is original and not a copy of a item that has already been created

corporeal —— relating to a person’s body, especially as opposed to their spirit: he was frank about his corporeal appetites.

• having a body: a corporeal God.• Law consisting of material objects; tangible: corporeal property.

 

(edifice) ?

— from the senses or through the senses –

Senses = Deceive 

(cerebella)

1-7

Man = consequently = sleep

dreams  – represent “something even less probable”

dreams aren’t as clear as reality 

sleep illusions – can deceiving 

novel – new idea- new work idea something that has never been done (fictitious) and new idea that dose not come as a copy of a original but rather a new idea it self.

“true and real or false and fantastic, are formed”

corporeal : relating to a person’s body, especially as opposed to their spirit

Physics, Astronomy, Medicine – dubious 

but

Arithmetic, Geometry – contain some measure of certainty and an element of the indubitable

“But possibly God has not desired that I should be thus deceived, for He is said to be supremely good. If, however, it is contrary to His goodness to have made me such that I constantly deceive myself, it would also appear to be contrary to His goodness to permit me to be sometimes deceived, and nevertheless I cannot doubt that He does permit this.”

antecedents – antecedent events: previous, earlier, prior, preceding, precursory, former, foregoing; formal anterior. ANTONYMS subsequent, later.

levity

 – humor or frivolity, especially the treatment of a serious matter with humor or in a manner lacking due respect: as an attempt to introduce a note of levity, the words were a disastrous flop.

henceforth 

  • from this time on or from that time on: the company announced that it would henceforth charge royalties.

In Meditation – 

                       The author question if there is a God and after that he questions him self for questioning such a thing.

“There may indeed be those who would prefer to deny the existence of a God so powerful, rather than believe that all other things are uncertain.”  – meaning there are those who would say there is no good because they dont want to admit that they them selves are just pawns. After that quote the author address his view of questioning everything that he had once believed in so deeply.

The author write those believes he now sees as false are still in the back of his head. And even tho he knows they are of false nature we will still come to them from time to time. Because at the end of the day what was true once and be seen as true again. Even when a man knows that they are surly of an uncertain nature. The author also adds that we our selves feel safe in our delution rather than safe a not so pleasant reality.

Blog Prompt 13: Descartes finally arrives at something he takes to be known with absolute certainty. What is it? How does he claim to know it? Do you think he has proven anything?

Descartes first starts off with questioning anything and everything. As Descartes continues his views of questioning anything and everything dose not change. It is as if he is a child who comes to this great idea that adults aren’t all knowing there are questions adults will never be able to answer. Even tho they may have theories on the world they do not know for sure what has happened. How the world came to be, they may have fossils but that isn’t the full story to what may have been. Uncovering some information dose not mean you know the full story but rather bits and pieces of it. Descartes released that he is that child who was tolled to believe in god and not question it. However when he grew into a man he seemed to want to question it all. This idea of questioning religion comes to a large number of children who grew up in very religious families. The problem with questioning your parents is that they them selves fear that they could be wrong. That they them selves were those children at a point and time, so they too may have been mislead. It isn’t the misleading that the parents are so worried about but rather the, fact that they may have believed in something false. Something so false they can not prove nor appose appropriately. 

Not to may children get to be born into a family like mine, where you have a supper religious mother and a open mined father. My father was similar to Descarte he questions everything his parents were so trying to teach him. He too had came from a supper religions family but rather than hop right in he would question each and every detail. He parents need to make him supper religious as well made him oppose them as hard as he could. Witch I believe had made him that much interesting and much more understanding to others. It all so lead him to try something different with his own children. My father never tolled us answer and would rather question out questions than answer one. He never once tolled us his religious views, to this day I unsure what it is my father truly believes in. However what I am sure is that my religious views are mine and mine alone. Even tho my mother did her bast to pass on her religion my father would question her every step of the way. It is that questioning that made me, see that my mother isn’t an all knowing goddess but rather a product of her parents and their views and opinions. My mother is that idea child who believes everything she is tolled a person who would rather go in line than question why the line in the first place. Here is an example of how brain washed he is when I was about 6 or 7 years old, I had a nice day with my grandmother. My mother had this need to question me about what I did and what grandmother said. Her questions were pretty annoying so after she asked me what did grandmother say. I answered her with “she said your an idiot”, it was funny watching her reaction. She ran to my father to find out if his mother had really said something like that. He looked at her will a big smile on his face. 

A person who can question everything they believe would question the child. Or remember that grandmother is an older lady who is well behaved. And is a bit positive and supper religious as well, so if she had made that connection surly she would realize that her child was playing a big of a joke on her. Or even if she had made the connection between her child’s sense of personality she would know it was clerkly a joke. Rather than asking her self what she knows and coming to a realization she ran to daddy to ask him. Daddy had no idea what I had done with grandmother that day or what she did. But he was able to make the connection and see the joke in it.

Blog Prompt 16: Hume believes that the self is an illusion or a fiction. What is his argument? Do you find it convincing? Why or why not?

Davie Hume   – Personal Identity 

Our self – succession of impressions

                ideas 

                memories 

According to him if we are those 3 things than are we no there when we sleep and have no thoughts. Or will be be gone forever after our death?”

“For  Hume, the self is simply an illusion or a fiction.” this is not a view Westerns would agree with however in the Eastern part of the world it is one some have

 

mind = theater – “where several perceptions successively make their appearance”

mind is a – succession of perceptions only

personal identity – bounds between perception 

Hume – a person’s consciousness, not whether he is the same person over time.

            an observation about experiences and then move to a consideration about the unity of consciousness. 

memory’s  employment of two principles 

                                              resemblance –“memory not only discovers the identity, but also contributes to its production, by producing the relation of resemblance among the perceptions”

                                              causation – “memory does not so much produce as discover personal identity, by shewing us the relation of cause and effect among our different perceptions.”

Hume attributes our sense of personal identity to memory.”

 But self or person is not any one impression, but that to which our several impressions and ideas are suppos’d to have a reference. “

For my part, when I enter most intimately into what I call myself, I always stumble on some particular perception or other, of hear or cold, light or shade, love or hatred, pain or pleasure. “

But serving aside some metaphysicians of this kind, I may mature to affirm of the rest of man kind, 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. “

“As to causation; we may observe, that the true idea of the human mind, is to consider it as a system of different perceptions or different existences, which are link’d together by the relation of cause and effect, and mutually  produced, destroy, influence, and modify each other. “

Weds: Class cancelled (Prof is ill) —         Blog Prompt 16:

Hume believes that the self is an illusion or a fiction. What is his argument? Do you find it convincing? Why or why not?

Hume believes that self is a self is an illusion or a fiction because they are just emotions and events that happen to us. Those events that happen to us are what shapes who we are having said that it means that if they wouldn’t have happened we our self would be different people. His argument dose hold some true to it after all it is what we as a society like to blame our life problems on. We are like Hume when we blame some for having more than we do or judging those who were born in to a live we wish we had. We fail to notice that it all could be achieved if we spend less time talking about how life is unfair and more working out butts off. Hume never used that example exactly but that is what he is getting at, in his view we are our events and that is that. It is as if he falls to acknowledge that just because we share the same events dose not mean those events effect us the same way. My brother and I share the same parents but he is more of a smarty pants than me. To prove him wrong we can look at twins, it is a known fact that even identical twins have different ways of thinking. Twins are a great example because children of the same age are raised the same. Yet the two have very different personalities tho they are raised in the same exact house with the same exact parents.  I do believe there is something more to it than that, like maybe this is something that dose not come with an explanation. After all even those that come with an explanation don’t apply to every case.

Blog Prompt 17: (choose one) Leonard relies upon scribbled notes to connect him to his past. He says that eyewitness testimony is worthless: “Memory can change the shape of a room…” Is he right? Do you think our memories are more reliable than his notes? Hume says identity is just a habit we have. Do you think Hume would see Leonard’s condition as any different from our own? Do you agree with Leonard’s statement that we all need mirrors to remind us who we are? In the movie the mirrors were his notes, the photographs, and tattoos. What has he become by relying upon them? What would you become without your own mirrors? How does a view of self that relies upon mirrors fit with Hume’s theory?

Blog Prompt 17: (choose one)

Leonard relies upon scribbled notes to connect him to his past. He says that eyewitness testimony is worthless: “Memory can change the shape of a room…” Is he right? Do you think our memories are more reliable than his notes? Hume says identity is just a habit we have. Do you think Hume would see Leonard’s condition as any different from our own?

Do you agree with Leonard’s statement that we all need mirrors to remind us who we are? In the movie the mirrors were his notes, the photographs, and tattoos. What has he become by relying upon them? What would you become without your own mirrors? How does a view of self that relies upon mirrors fit with Hume’s theory?

Leonard is right eyewitness testimony isn’t worth much. After all people are not great at details and do not have picture memory. We may remember the main idea but we fail to keep up with the details. A great example of that is watching a movie, there are very few of us that can retell it that same day without forgetting any detail. Asking someone about details the next day could help them remember more detail of mix up with the details they already mentioned. A person retelling this story can get so mixed up that he or she may make up some of it. By make up some of it I mean, tell us how they connected the dots. Their connections of dots can but totally wrong and hold no merit at all. They would connect things with prior memories of witch we have no knowledge of. If we have no knowledge of them we may not have that same connections as he or she do. Making that connection in court can make that eyewitness seem worthless, adding to that conclusion could be that lack of detail.

Detailed stories are easy to believe, we learn that from lying to our parents about our whereabouts. If I tolled my parents I was at the movies and not out drinking. They may not believe me, however if I tolled them I was at the movies and mentioned a movie. That could let them know that yes my child was at the movies. Another thing to mention when telling your parents a lie one must not only tell them a movie but a movie that is actually out. Telling them an old one will not be of much help or telling them one that isn’t out. Parents now a days aren’t as stupid as they seem they can google it and see what movies are out. Another thing to add to your story is what is that movie about. Picking a movie you have no knowledge about would out you real quick. As your parents are playing detective they may also read some reviews and ask your opinion about that. If you fail to answer about what your thought about it, it to can out you.

Parents aren’t the only ones that use a line of questions policeman too ask a lot of questions. They do not ask those questions to know what your favorite type of movie is but rather to see if they can catch you in a lie. Once you catch that lie you stick to it and question more about that, dropping questions about other things or events. Eyewitness testimony is very much worthless after all questioning each and every detail would help you pock holes in the story of the witnessed events.

Leonards memories are as unreliable as his notes. We see that from the fact that he cant remember who he is in the now. Living with the then and not seeing the now can cause  you to lose the now. It is unhealthy to not know who you are in the now, after all he was made into a monster and used as a tool to kill. Being that tool to kill wouldn’t have happened if he knew he had already killed the man he was looking for. His notes on the other hand are of no use he ends up killing a guy who helped him find a guy who killed his wife. But at the same time that same guy made him kill a drug dealer who had nothing to do with him. But then again that drug dealer sold drugs who is to say those drugs weren’t the ones in the system of the guy who killed his wife.

I do not believe that Hume would say Lenard’s condition is any different from our own after all we too don’t have a full picture. We have bits and pieces of our memory, not the full picture of it. We may have knowledge of yesterday but it too lacks detail and there by missing bits and pieces of it self. I would say we need more than just mirrors to remind us who we are. We need to first address who we are and what got us to that conclusion. Because if it is out memories it is inaccurate after all we still miss details.

Our mirrors  are things that make us us. However it is important to remember that we aren’t the only ones that can be using those things to identify our self. We aren’t as one of a kind as we may thing there for we must first stop any think what is “myself” what makes me me? Or what makes I and I and not a you or her or him. And if those things  are taking away are we still our self or all we a empty vessel.

Notes

Cause and Effect – connected (or are they connected?)