In the theory, Miller believes in the life after death and seems relatively unconcerned of anybody death. Miler in an argument tries to define a person where she describes the existence of a person in the future due to unavoidable fact that her body will shortly decompose, she rejects this description. According to Miller theory of personal identity, says that any person would be the same person in the future, as the person would not have changed but remain the sameness. A counter provided by Miller is that there being a soul, mind or self across time is identical across time basis the identity of the two people. Weirob because of the difficulty of making implications and observing such things, becomes unconvinced as its just that the person’s body appears over time to be the same leads to the thinking that a person has the same soul over time, yet we cannot observe the soul. Miller argues that he can conclude fro that case to other persons’ bodies and souls as he knows that overtime, his own soul has been associated with his own body. Personal identity as viewed is not about a person identity or the self image as in ordinary disclosure its often talked about as this question is about time-slice in earlier and later time slices.
Miller argues that at time A, one is the same person and successive at time B, where one remembers time A at time B. He argues claiming one can survive death if, there is a person with ones life memories which leads to bringing more doubt as there is a problem of false memory as for example one might have memories which he/she has never experienced. The theory state that contradictions arises as Miller suggests that God created all beings with same memories but when we come to identical identity beings differ differently.
Miller uses the theory of Same body same self to suggest that surviving death is possible where he argues that this theory rule is a thumb only applicable on this earth as it is a well-confirmed consistency but as it is not of importance theoretical claim it cannot be known as a priori. He argues that it cannot be known through experience, as we do not experience other people souls and gave box of chocolate as an example. Miller sees the possibility of them meeting and imagines being together sometime in the future totally at different places by using the Kleenex box where he argues that there can be similar box which is seen as irrelevant to Weirob as she sees that she cannot rot, and at the same time exist somewhere.
The memory theory also tries to explain life after death where Miller gave an example that it makes sense for a person asking whether the ongoing game is the same game as it was before he/she went for coffee. Rather than asking whether the game is as the same game itself as how one sees now is connected by what was before. To him a person is a tributary of awareness as a person may proclaim to be the same person he/she was 3 years ago and that people can extend their consciousness backward and forward in time. His theory basically states that individual – stage X and individual- stage Y, according to stream of consciousness are part bringing the possibility of survival after death.
Weirob challenges Miller in that she sees soul is defined as something immaterial which cannot be touched, felt or smelt yet material bodies are all we access. Souls cannot be sensed or felt I any way according to her in any way. One can only conclude a person is the same as she/he was last week only by what seen or sensed but no one is capable of sensing the soul. Weirob argues that through psychological characteristics that people has sameness of soul its impossible to judge. In the case of memory view, Weirob seems to remain unconvinced for to her Miller must be specific on the case of being connected in the best way really means. She is not convinced even after Miller responds by saying all it has to do with is memories and that it only needs someone to retain the memories of his past self, and is in the right sort of way psychologically connected. Weirob carefully point out that there is a much difference between seeming to remember and actually remembering where she gives an example of a sci-fi movie. She claims that most theory will not kill immortality
Miller and Dave were in the idea that the event of Julia North Case would prove Weirob wrong of that girl killed in accidence. Julia was trying to save the life of a child but ended up being hit by a train, which led to the child’s mother, having stroke watching the scene. Julia body was destroyed leaving her brains unscathed, which the opposite was true to the child’s mother so they put the brains into the woman with stroke. This resulted to the person looking exactly as the woman who had stroke and had her body, but had the psychological traits and memory of Julia
Miller and Cohen best responded to the problems raised by Weirob by providing these facts. Cohen would seek assistance from even the supreme courts as it is seen that normal cases do not apply and maybe the court can resolve questions. Weirob is so much stubborn as she claims that applying the conventions or words adopted by any legal body is not the only issue of personal identity. These two continues to respond to Weirob problems until she is almost dead where Cohen introduces another theory but does not get the chance to elaborate but results to be very interesting. They tried to convince Weirob of life after death for three nights with Miller providing a series of theories and supporting them to convince Weirob. Miller sees that Weirob has lost hope of living again or another life and they spend three days arguing the theories to give hope to her.
Conclusion
The discussion above argues of what a person is or is not. Weirob was against the fact that surviving death is possible as an argument arises between her and Miller on the theory of personal identity. Since death reaches to Weirob without change of belief, these theories should help one keep his/her faith of what next after death as seen from the above discussion it is almost impossible to change the beliefs of any individual.
Work Cited
Philosophical Inquiry: Classic and Contemporary Readings [Paperback] BY: Jonathan E. Adler (Author) , Catherine Z. Elgin (Editor)
