In chapter XXVII of the essay Identity and Diversity, author John Locke discusses many types of identities and provides multiple examples of these identities. However, to understand identity and its many components, we must first grasp the concept of identity itself as Locke understood it. Locke states that when we compare something that exists at one time or place, we compare it with the context in which it exists at another time or place and when we see something at one time, we we are sure that it is this thing that exists and it does not exist. exist in another place at the same time. This is what the idea of ​​identity consists of, so it follows that a thing cannot have more than one beginning and that two things of the same kind cannot exist in the same place or at the same time. . Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay In total, Locke highlights four types of identities that can apply to the individual, to oneself, or even in the case of Melanie. First, Locke discusses the structure and organization of particles and their ability to remain unchanged over time as an identity. “Suppose an atom, that is to say a continuous body under an immutable surface, existing in a determinate time and place; it is obvious that, considered at any moment of his existence, he is at that moment the same with himself. Here, Locke states that atoms are continuous bodies that reside in their designated space and that they exist at specified times and places. It follows therefore that if two atoms united to produce the same mass, each atom would remain the same under the influence of space. rule of blacksmithing according to Locke. However, if an atom were to be subtracted or added, it would no longer be the same body. Second, Locke discusses the idea of ​​identity in living creatures and how their identity is not based on the mass of the same particles. “An oak which grows from a plant to a large tree, and then is cut down, is still the same oak; and a foal become a horse, now fat, now thin, is at the same time the same horse: although in both cases there may be a manifest change of parts; so that in reality they are neither the same masses of matter, although they are in reality one of the same oak and the other of the same horse. As some organisms age, their mass increases and particles once attached to their bodies may fall off and no longer be associated as part of the animal, for example a deer's antlers falling off due to weight. Living creatures can change shape and size over time, but ultimately they remain the same over time. This means that regardless of mass or a change in shape or size, a being's identity remains the same. Third, Locke discusses the identity of complex bodies such as machines and then makes a comparison with how this can be observed in animals. “What is a watch?” It is clear that it is nothing more than an organization or construction of parts adapted to a certain purpose, which it is capable of achieving when sufficient force is added. If we supposed this machine as a continuous body, of which all the organized parts were repaired, increased or diminished by a constant addition or separation of insensible parts, with a common life, we should have something very similar to the body of an animal . Locke says that humans, like machines, are organized and constructed in such a way that when force is applied, we are able to reach and function. For a watch, theMovement is created artificially, however, humans possess a soul that allows them to perform such movements naturally. Fourth and finally, Locke discusses the identity of persons and consciousness. “It must be admitted that if the same consciousness (which, as we have shown, is an entirely different thing from the same numerical figure or the same movement of the body) can be transferred from one thinking substance to another, it will be possible that two thoughtsubstances can form only one person. This means that as long as individual A's consciousness remains intact and is transferred into individual B, individual A will have successfully transferred their identity into individual B's body. I believe that the second and fourth identities are the most relevant to Melanie’s situation. In the second identity, Locke states that identity does not rely on the mass of the same particles and in the fourth identity, Locke states that consciousness can be transferred from one body to another. These specific examples may attempt to explain what happened and which individual is responsible for the change in identity regarding Melanie, because as long as her consciousness remains the same and intact, she is the same person, regardless of her body. Locke presents various interesting examples. questions of identity, I believe that there is an example that is most relevant in the case of Melanie who wakes up in the body of her friend Aisha. Locke describes the story of a man who was convinced that he had acquired the soul of Socrates. Locke says: suppose this man has an immaterial mind which can think for man, but man remains the same on the outside. Would this man be able to consider Socrates' actions as his own? According to Locke, he is no more himself than Socrates and to everyone else the man has remained the same. “But although the same immaterial substance or soul does not by itself make, wherever it is and in whatever state it may be, the same man; yet it is a simple conscience.” Locke states that it is not just a soul or substance that makes the same man/woman the same man/woman in another body, it is the entirety of consciousness. This is relevant in Melanie's case because, just like the man who acquires Socrates' soul, Melanie wakes up in the body of another person, her friend Aisha and according to Locke, Melanie's consciousness should have remained intact and placed in Aisha's body for Melanie. saying that she is actually in another body. In both cases it seems that the immaterial soul/spirit, as well as consciousness, has been transferred into a new body and since the criterion is the same for Socrates' consciousness and Melanie's consciousness, what Locke says about man can also apply. exactly the same way for Mélanie. According to Locke, when you look at the woman in the hotel room, you see Aisha's physical body but the spirit (consciousness) will be that of Melanie. Locke gives an example very similar to that of Melanie. Locke says that the soul of a prince, along with the memories of his past, enters the body of a shoemaker. Whatever the shoemaker sees, the prince does too, and whatever the prince does, good or bad, the prince is responsible. “But who would say it was the same man? The body also participates in the creation of man and, I suppose, it is up to everyone to determine man in this case; in which the soul, with all its princely thoughts about it, would not make another man: but it would be the same shoemaker to all, except to itself. Unfortunately, this scenario is not in the shoemaker's best interest. To everyone, the shoemaker remains the shoemaker, however, the shoemaker is the only one who knows that the prince is inside his body. Therefore, if the prince commits crimes..