Abstract
The main idea for which I have argued in the foregoing four chapters is the following: The connections between mental states that are constitutive of the kind of psychological continuity that can function as a criterion of personal identity must be conceived—briefly put—in terms of a diachronic holism of mental contents (see Chapter 5, Section 2) rather than in terms of overlapping causal connections between the substrata of qualitatively similar states. Therefore, as far as psychological continuity is concerned, mental states ought to be identified and individuated in terms of their contents rather than their substrata. Only thus can we grant the narrative, process-like succession of mental states and the intimate relation between psychological continuity and embodiment in a physical world the relevance that is their philosophical due.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
