Derek Parfit's reductionist account of personal identity shows that 'the self' whose flourishing is conceived is not a robust enough entity to generate necessary social extensions.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Derek Parfit(as a philosopher being cited for his theory on personal identity): A highly influential philosopher who argued that personal identity (what makes you 'you' over time) is less important than we think, and that we're not the unified, continuous selves we assume we are.
Flourishing(the positive state that might be prevented by MPS): A state of living well and reaching your full potential as a person; achieving excellence in how you live.
Necessary(ontological distinction in Mulla Sadra's metaphysics): The principle, God; pure existence without essence, quality or property that undergoes change or motion
Reductionist account(Ockham's approach to explaining relations): An explanation that breaks something complex down into simpler parts, arguing that the complex thing is really just made up of those simpler components.

Based on where you are in your exploration