Diversity in unity: practical unity and personal boundaries
- 171 Downloads
In the spirit of the discussion in Daniel Kolak’s I Am You: The Metaphysical Foundation for Global Ethics, I consider the way in which divisions that we usually think of as borders between distinct people occur within a single life. Starting with the dispute between constructionist and non-constructionist views of persons, I argue for a view that places the unity of persons in the dynamic generated by simultaneously taking a constructionist and non-constructionist view of oneself. In order to unify ourselves as agents we need to treat past and future selves as others, but to motivate this endeavor we need to think of ourselves as temporally extended agents, and so identify with past and future selves. Understanding this dynamic illuminates the structure of our agency and the unity of the self.
KeywordsPersonal identity Self Reductionism Agency Practical reasoning
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Ainslie G. (2001). Breakdown of will. Cambridge, Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
- Bratman, M. (1999). Planning and temptation. In Faces of intention (pp. 35–57). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Bratman M. (2000). Reflection, planning, and temporally extended agency. Philosophical Review 109(1): 35–61Google Scholar
- Elster J. (2000). Ulysses unbound. Cambridge, Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
- Korsgaard C. (1989). Personal identity and human agency: A Kantian response to parfit. Philosophy and Public Affairs 18(2): 101–132Google Scholar
- Nagel T. (1970). The possibility of altruism. Princeton, Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
- Nietzsche, F. (1998). On the genealogy of morality (trans: Clark, M. & Swensen, A. J.). Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
- Parfit D. (1984). Reasons and persons. Oxford, Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
- Sartre J.P. (1992). Being and nothingness (trans: Barnes, H.). New York, Washington Square PressGoogle Scholar
- Wollheim R. (1984). The thread of life. Cambridge, Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar