A222 - Exploring Philosophy : End of Week 2

The introduction to the ‘Ship of Theseus’ in Chapter 1 and the first two activities are interesting.This is the questions that if Theseus’ ship is constantly repaired and over time everything is renewed, is it still his ship ? 

Having just done DD101, looking at the ‘Ship of Theseus’ thought experiment from an identity point of view, I’d say that the planks that were replaced, and the planks that were used to replace the old planks, were to all intents and purposes lacking in individual identity.  So, when the planks were taken from the ship they lost the identity of the being part of the ship and this identity was taken by the new parts. This would have been the same for the rusty nails, torn sails etc. So the overall identity of the ship was maintained, as there was always far more of the established ship existing than the new parts being added. Much the same as when your car has its oil, brake pads, windscreen wipers, tyres, spark plugs changed throughout its life – if this was no longer your car then the DVLA and your insurance company may have some philosophical problems of their own !!!

So back to the ship,  the next question posed was had somebody gathered all the discarded pieces and reassembled it which ship was then the true ship of Theseus – the ship of discarded parts may seem identical to the Ship of Theseus, but could not be the Ship of Theseus, as that identity is still carried forward by the maintained ship.

There would also be some questions about whether the ‘ship’ constructed of discarded parts is actually a ship –it may look like a ship, but would YOU go to sea in it – rotten planks, rusty nails and torn sails – No of course not - so if it looks the same, and may even be constructed of the same materials, but fails to carry out the function it was originally was built for, how can it claim to be the ‘same’ ship.  

This would be the same if your car was involved in an accident and had the chassis replaced, your CAM belt then broke and you needed a new engine, you also needed various panels replaced due to minor bumps – if somebody gathered your old parts from previous services etc. and re-assembled an object that looked like your car, would it be your car - would it even move, and if it did move would it be safe – of course not, so this could not be your car….

I think this is different for ‘objects’ in which the individual parts are unique and have personality. There are several bands that now that have maybe only one original member left performing, but have still carried the band's name forward. Status Quo for example have two original members, if they were to leave the rest of the band may well continue on as Status Quo, but if the original 5 members then got back together again they would surely be the ‘real’ Status Quo as they are unarguably 5 unique parts of the original. Although they would have changed physically over the years, if the purpose of the band is to make music, and these were the original writers and performers, they must be the ‘real’ Staus Quo.

The next part of the chapter asks is it is right to hold people responsible for their actions of long ago – is the concentration camp guard still the same person he was 75 years ago, and should he be held to account for these crimes if he can’t remember them. This is only tackled from a philosophical point of view (obviously), as the only practical answer, I think, can be yes – or else anarchy rules and the need for the wronged to get revenge is not met.

However the following thought experiments on ‘The Prince and the Cobbler’, the 'Night and Day Man’ and the drunk, are all interesting discussion points.

I have to admit that I was not sure I would enjoy or understand philosophy, but is has been a good and interesting start.

The main things from Chapter 1 are I think,

• The question of ‘self’ is an important philosophical concept with implications regarding ethics, morality and law.
• One stance on ‘self’ from John Locke said that what makes someone the same person over time was memory continuity not necessarily bodily continuity.

First tutorial tomorrow, so that should be interesting……….