Sample Philosophy Essays On A Dialogue Between Miller and Weirob

Homework Question on A Dialogue between Miller and Weirob

1. Explain how Weirob argues that Miller’s plan to base personal identity on soul identity fails. Be sure to include her argument for why soul identity judgments are not, in her opinion, reliable.
2. Explain how Weirob criticizes the proposal that personal identity can be based on really remembering when really remembering is defined in this way: Really remembering — seeming to remember plus being identical with the person who did what is remembered.
3. When Miller proposes that our memories can be preserved in the after-life by means of a Heavenly duplicate of our earthly brains, Cohen proposes a way to avoid the possibility of branching caused by the possibility of more than one heavenly duplicate brain. Explain why it is good to avoid the problem of branching and explain what Cohen’s proposal is for avoiding that problem when Miller uses the heavenly duplicates in his argument.
4. Explain how Weirob criticizes Cohen’s proposal that you have discussed in question #4. Do you think Weirob’s criticism is effective? Defend your answer.

Homework Answer on A Dialogue between Miller and Weirob

#1

Weirob states that personal and soul identities do not originate from immaterial souls. He states that we cannot have a notion of the soul repeatedly. He goes further to tell Miller that he does not doubt his own existence because he understands himself, as he is conscious and overweight. He has the understanding that he is a living being and Miller can confirm that visibly.

He however refutes that souls can provide identity for an individual. Weirob further states that there is no trace of the soul’s association with the body as it is with the body. He disqualifies the judgment concerning souls, stating that they are baseless and full of mysteries.

#2

Weirob does not agree with the proposal that personal identity can be based on remembering since there is a distinction between actual remembering and the phrase remember. He uses an example of the Napoleon war where the men who claim to remember losing the war may be regarded as sincere but in really the fail to realize that they are neither Napoleon nor were they part of the battle. He states that the actual act of remembering is dependent on not literally the doer but rather the ability of a third part to identify him/her with the subject matter.