Theseus' Ship and People

[Rapier]

For those unknowing, the Ship of Theseus is a philosophical paradox first brought up by Plutarch. Basically, it tells about the preservation of Theseus' Ship by changing its pieces when they became too old/decayed to the point one wonders if it is the same ship that it was before, as nothing of it remained but its name.

"The ship wherein Theseus and the youth of Athens returned from Crete had thirty oars, and was preserved by the Athenians down even to the time of Demetrius Phalereus, for they took away the old planks as they decayed, putting in new and stronger timber in their place, in so much that this ship became a standing example among the philosophers, for the logical question of things that grow; one side holding that the ship remained the same, and the other contending that it was not the same."

The question is, does it also happen to people? Do they change enough to become unrecognizable from what they once were? For example, is it possible that an old friend changes so much that you can't think of him anymore as the same friend? Is it also possible for someone to change so much to the point their beliefs and feelings also change drastically, making him seem like a completely different person?

[Cowboy Karimov]

This is a very intresting point you bring up. But what do you mean by their changing? Our personality and behavior, when not controlled by things such as depression, pretty much remain unchanged throughout our life.

[dondon151]

The question is, does it also happen to people? Do they change enough to become unrecognizable from what they once were? For example, is it possible that an old friend changes so much that you can't think of him anymore as the same friend? Is it also possible for someone to change so much to the point their beliefs and feelings also change drastically, making him seem like a completely different person?

yes, just look at your former high school friends after you've graduated from undergrad and haven't interacted with them for 4 years.

[Rapier]

yes, just look at your former high school friends after you've graduated from undergrad and haven't interacted with them for 4 years.

I don't mean socioeconomically or that sort of change. I mean drastic personality changes that makes an individual undistinguishable from what he was before, changes that makes you think that person hardly ressembles the person you once knew.

This is a very intresting point you bring up. But what do you mean by their changing? Our personality and behavior, when not controlled by things such as depression, pretty much remain unchanged throughout our life.

Is that so? I'm not so sure. Don't the experiences of an individual have a hand on changing his personality and behavior? Or does this apply only to our thoughts and maturity?

Edited April 16, 2014 by Rapier

[Cowboy Karimov]

I don't mean socioeconomically or that sort of change. I mean drastic personality changes that makes an individual undistinguishable from what he was before, changes that makes you think that person hardly ressembles the person you once knew.

Is that so? I'm not so sure. Don't the experiences of an individual have a hand on changing his personality and behavior? Or does this apply only to our thoughts and maturity?

What I mean is that the way we think and look at things doesn't really change. Let's pretend that there's a very bright ten-year-old named Philip. He thinks in a very analytical way, and he likes to read a lot. But as, say, a thirty-year-old, he hates reading but still thinks in that same analytical way. His interest in reading stopped for some reason or another, but he thinks and looks at things the same way(not counting maturity and attention span) as he was ten. You can't change your core personality, you're born with it. You can't change your personality from aggressive to serene, and vice versa.

[Chiki]

It is the same object, since it's a gradual change over time.

Think of it this way. We often say someone is still the same person even though they change a lot, right? The reason we can do so is because there's psychological connectedness between different slices of space time for that person. So right now I'm very very similar to myself yesterday. These chains of psychological connectedness establish psychological continuity, which explains why people can change a lot and still be the same person.

You can apply this sort of example to objects and such.

[dondon151]

I don't mean socioeconomically or that sort of change. I mean drastic personality changes that makes an individual undistinguishable from what he was before, changes that makes you think that person hardly ressembles the person you once knew.

i have a friend from high school whom i got along with and he's now, to my knowledge, a bible-thumping gun lover. i doubt we'll get along on any level deeper than casual acquaintances. (though, how well-acquainted are you with a typical high school friend, really? probably not very much at all.)

[jiodi]

Considering we were like, just atoms a few billion years ago I'd say we've changed a lot.

How much of the matter sitting around you used to be something completely different, unrecognizable?

[Arrout]

I was affected pretty hard from this.

I do think that people can change to become unrecognizable.

It happened with my first love interest, and after I got over my feelins, my best friend, she was a very kind, caring, and funny person... She has changed completely, I've tried to understand it, I have tried to talk to her, but nothing seems to work. So I just stopped being her friend, I didn't feel bad, she wasn't the same person I once knew, even after she came after me wanting to know why I didn't want to talk to her anymore.

It is perfectly possible for this to happen, at least to me it was proven

[Kay]

What I mean is that the way we think and look at things doesn't really change. Let's pretend that there's a very bright ten-year-old named Philip. He thinks in a very analytical way, and he likes to read a lot. But as, say, a thirty-year-old, he hates reading but still thinks in that same analytical way. His interest in reading stopped for some reason or another, but he thinks and looks at things the same way(not counting maturity and attention span) as he was ten. You can't change your core personality, you're born with it. You can't change your personality from aggressive to serene, and vice versa.

I don't agree with this. I think there are aspects of your personality that might be pretty hard to change, but that's it.

I think people can change that much, but the difference is that we're people, not ships. As long as you believe that human beings have any kind of soul or spirit, a "true self" of some sort, I would say that someone cannot change so much as to truly no longer be the same person. But to be a completely different person functionally, that is entirely possible.

[BK-201]

It is the same object, since it's a gradual change over time.

Think of it this way. We often say someone is still the same person even though they change a lot, right? The reason we can do so is because there's psychological connectedness between different slices of space time for that person. So right now I'm very very similar to myself yesterday. These chains of psychological connectedness establish psychological continuity, which explains why people can change a lot and still be the same person.

You can apply this sort of example to objects and such.

I don't see why you can't argue the inverse from this. Just because it's a gradual change doesn't rule out the fact that the summation of these gradual changes is equivalent to a different entity. Like take a linear graph for example, just because the line is the summation of gradual choices does not mean that point a on the graph is the same on point b. With people/objects, they are the same only in name from this exact argument. Nothing about continuity entails that a lack of change in identity.

Also since you seem to rest it on the assumption that people "can change a lot and still be the same person", you have all those people saying "wow I was a completely different person back then" as a counter argument.

[Chiki]

I don't see why you can't argue the inverse from this. Just because it's a gradual change doesn't rule out the fact that the summation of these gradual changes is equivalent to a different entity. Like take a linear graph for example, just because the line is the summation of gradual choices does not mean that point a on the graph is the same on point b. With people/objects, they are the same only in name from this exact argument. Nothing about continuity entails that a lack of change in identity.

Also since you seem to rest it on the assumption that people "can change a lot and still be the same person", you have all those people saying "wow I was a completely different person back then" as a counter argument.

I like how you're using big words here to look smart. Intuitively we still think that people are the same person when they say "I was a completely different person back then." They don't actually think they're a different person. They just want to say they had many gradual changes. Otherwise, their parents and friends would be abandoning them! Ted Sider says the same thing on page 2 in the link below.

http://tedsider.org/books/chapters_1_5.pdf read page 6 and after.

Edited May 2, 2014 by Chiki

[BK-201]

I like how you're using big words here to look smart. Intuitively we still think that people are the same person when they say "I was a completely different person back then." They don't actually think they're a different person. They just want to say they had many gradual changes. Otherwise, their parents and friends would be abandoning them! Ted Sider says the same thing on page 2 in the link below.

http://tedsider.org/books/chapters_1_5.pdf read page 6 and after.

Implying you aren't ever guilty of the same thing and as if that's a legitimate argument.

I see two types of sameness, numeric and personal and the whole issue of personal is an issue of subjective bias. The way you perceive yourself you aren't going to perceive and drastic change to where you become a different person wholly, neither does your family see this. However, that doesn't disprove whether or not something can change to such an extent that it's different from before. Granted it's the same human being physically but if the components are different enough you can argue they've become a "different" person in some sense of the word. If you were to change from the person you were 10 years ago to the person you are today, would your family still see you in the same light?

Issues like continuity of ourselves and of the universe are debated and there are people who do question whether the self exists as a continuous being or a constantly changing form that isn't the same as it was before.

[Chiki]

Implying you aren't ever guilty of the same thing and as if that's a legitimate argument.

I see two types of sameness, numeric and personal and the whole issue of personal is an issue of subjective bias. The way you perceive yourself you aren't going to perceive and drastic change to where you become a different person wholly, neither does your family see this. However, that doesn't disprove whether or not something can change to such an extent that it's different from before. Granted it's the same human being physically but if the components are different enough you can argue they've become a "different" person in some sense of the word. If you were to change from the person you were 10 years ago to the person you are today, would your family still see you in the same light?

Issues like continuity of ourselves and of the universe are debated and there are people who do question whether the self exists as a continuous being or a constantly changing form that isn't the same as it was before.

Ok, first of all you have a major problem expressing yourself clearly. This isn't the first time. It's fine to use technical jargon, but your sentences are just really convoluted and difficult to understand.

Second, sorry, but you're really confused. Personal identity is not subjective.You're making a very basic mistake here. We know Superman = Clark Kent. They're one and the same (numerically identical). Surprisingly, Superman and Clark Kent are the same person. But this just is not a matter of opinion. The goal of personal identity is to find what Superman and Clark Kent have in common that makes them the same person.

Edited May 2, 2014 by Chiki

[BK-201]

Ok, first of all you have a major problem expressing yourself clearly. This isn't the first time. It's fine to use technical jargon, but your sentences are just really convoluted and difficult to understand.

Second, sorry, but you're really confused. Personal identity is not subjective.You're making a very basic mistake here. We know Superman = Clark Kent. They're one and the same (numerically identical). Surprisingly, Superman and Clark Kent are the same person. But this just is not a matter of opinion. The goal of personal identity is to find what Superman and Clark Kent have in common that makes them the same person.

Ironic considering your history and constant usage of technical definitions in situations that call for colloquial uses.

Except the question originally posed wasn't originally about personal identity, the question is whether a person can change enough to "become" a different person. There are plenty of people who would argue that a person is defined by their collective experiences, etc. and therefore someone is not the "same" person when taken at different points in time.

[Chiki]

Ironic considering your history and constant usage of technical definitions in situations that call for colloquial uses.

Except the question originally posed wasn't originally about personal identity, the question is whether a person can change enough to "become" a different person. There are plenty of people who would argue that a person is defined by their collective experiences, etc. and therefore someone is not the "same" person when taken at different points in time.

Finally starting to make some sense! There's a really basic problem here though. A person becoming a different person is.. guess what.. a change in personal identity. Lol.

[Moira]

It seems to me more like you're building yourself up through time, and more pieces are just added with more experiences. Your past is always going to be a part of you (assuming you don't permanently lose your memory) but you'll be gaining more throughout time. Does that make sense to anyone else?

[Chiki]

It seems to me more like you're building yourself up through time, and more pieces are just added with more experiences. Your past is always going to be a part of you (assuming you don't permanently lose your memory) but you'll be gaining more throughout time. Does that make sense to anyone else?

You're also losing a lot gradually over time.

[MercyWalk]

You're also losing a lot gradually over time.

A lot of what

[Moira]

You're also losing a lot gradually over time.

I don't personally feel like I've lost anything, but that it's just an ever changing culmination of experiences that gives me shape.

[Chiki]

A lot of what

I don't personally feel like I've lost anything, but that it's just an ever changing culmination of experiences that gives me shape.

We definitely lose memories. For example, I don't remember what I ate for dinner 10 years ago yesterday, but I do remember what I ate for dinner yesterday.

[Moira]

We definitely lose memories. For example, I don't remember what I ate for dinner 10 years ago yesterday, but I do remember what I ate for dinner yesterday.

Of course there's a lot of minutia that doesn't really affect us that is forgotten. But something important, something that affects me and changes me is always remembered. Even if the particular event is forgotten, it's changes are still there.

[Chiki]

Of course there's a lot of minutia that doesn't really affect us that is forgotten. But something important, something that affects me and changes me is always remembered. Even if the particular event is forgotten, it's changes are still there.

Yes, events important to a person are remembered. But it's a lot harder to establish what memory is objectively more important.

[MercyWalk]

The argument is whether or not it happens to humans, I'd say no you cannot change who you are completely. You are made up of your base properties (physical body) within this, you add your experiences, emotions, memories etc. and thus you take a different form through actions, behavior and such, think of it (although not completely) as the transformations of Buu in Dragon Ball.

Edited May 3, 2014 by Alb

[Original Alear]

I don't agree with HeavyBrawlsGuy when he says that personalities always remain the same. I used to be very high strung and tense over very small matters, and also very opinionated, now I'm laid back and apathetic about matters that can be pretty significant, and more likely to lack opinions (though obviously I do have some about this matter at the present time). I also know others who have gone through similar changes. Rapier seemed to think that Dondon's comment about high school friends 4 years later was about socioeconomic matters, but I've seen changes in my friends' personalities like Dondon cited. One is a lot less bossy and argumentative than he used to be, and also (IMO) more of a nerd. Another seems less naive than he used to be. Granted, I would say that more of my friends didn't change that much compared to when they were in high school compared to those who did change, but it does happen from what I've seen.

Of course, it is possible that it was the environment I was in with those friends that caused different aspects of their personality to manifest or w/e, but for my part I'd say the one who I described as "less bossy" acts in different ways given similar circumstances (as do I, IMO).

To be pointlessly specific, I'm going to add that I don't think anyone ever becomes "completely" different, except maybe once they stop being? A corpse can still have qualities that are recognizable to those who knew the person in question when they were still alive. But it seems like most of us are talking about substantial change rather than all-encompassing change (or maybe I didn't read the posts very well).