Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Re-identifying immaterial souls by re-identifying their e... — Carmelics
    Home/Afterlife & Death
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Re-identifying immaterial souls by re-identifying their embodiment is not always possible.

    Afterlife & Death
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • Prior at least to the advent of DNA testing, cases of disputed identity could not always be settled by re-identifying bodies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Bodily continuity, even when disputed, remains the primary criterion by which personal identity is adjudicated in practice across legal and social institutions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The impossibility of resolution in edge cases does not undermine the general reliability of embodiment as a re-identification method for souls.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Locke's distinction between personal identity and substance identity shows that psychological continuity—memory and consciousness—can re-identify persons independently of bodily or soul-substance tracking.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If immaterial souls can be re-identified through psychological continuity chains rather than embodiment, then the failure of bodily re-identification does not entail the failure of soul re-identification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Afterlife & Death

    Related

    Bodily continuity, even when disputed, remains the primary criterion by which pe...If immaterial souls can be re-identified through psychological continuity chains...Locke's distinction between personal identity and substance identity shows that ...Prior at least to the advent of DNA testing, cases of disputed identity could no...
    +1 moreShow less
    The impossibility of resolution in edge cases does not undermine the general rel...

    Similar

    We cannot make judgments about the identity of souls because souls are...81%The soul is immaterial and therefore indivisible79%The identity of a person over time cannot consist of the identity of t...78%When we make judgments about the identity of persons we are not making...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: afterlife
    View source passageHide passage
    The metaphysical question having been disposed of, it becomes apparent that the epistemological question is less significant than it may appear to be at first. How do we re-identify immaterial souls over time? Under normal circumstances, we do this by re-identifying the embodiment of the soul, but this is not always possible: prior at least to the advent of DNA testing, cases of disputed identity could not always be settled by re-identifying bodies. Sometimes the subject’s memory of events is an important clue, though not of course an infallible one. But can any tests establish the identity of...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit