Scan barcode
clayjs's review against another edition
Too dense for audio. If I ever care enough to read this, I'll read it for real.
kuru's review against another edition
informative
reflective
slow-paced
4.0
Mostly the parts about consciousness was interesting. I think the book should've been two or three different books.
jonathanlibrarian's review against another edition
5.0
Brain burning analytical reasoning. Changed my perspective on personal identity and introduced me to a number of challenging ethical questions I never considered. Part 1 was the weakest for me. I do not know how effectively Parfit argued against the Self Interest Theory.
anpi's review against another edition
5.0
This goes right to my top 3 favorites – with Gödel, Escher, Bach and Consciousness Explained – arguing how we are not.
hammo's review against another edition
5.0
DONE, BITCHES!
The most challenging book I've yet read. And it only took like 8 months. And that's not including the false from a couple of years ago.
I was surprised that the bit quoted in Nick Bostrom's paper on Existential Risk as a Global Priority only occurred on the second to last page.
More to follow after I collate my notes.
The most challenging book I've yet read. And it only took like 8 months. And that's not including the false from a couple of years ago.
I was surprised that the bit quoted in Nick Bostrom's paper on Existential Risk as a Global Priority only occurred on the second to last page.
More to follow after I collate my notes.
davidmencik's review against another edition
5.0
One of the best books on the theme of Philosophy of mind that I have read. For me the most interesting section was the "Divided minds" thought experiment, which I spoke about in my scientific paper regarding the identity loss and identity theft possibilities.
You can read my short although interesting paper here
https://doi.org/10.12681/cjp.22283
You can read my short although interesting paper here
https://doi.org/10.12681/cjp.22283
lisarue's review
3.0
This book is hard for somebody not steeped in philosophical arguments and history. However, there were some parts that were almost too easy to grasp, as if Parfit expected to really have to work hard to make his case. I suspect this has to do with the book being written 30years ago, when probably Parfits peers and students hadn't all read volumes and volumes of science fiction.
For example, Parfit very carefully explains the concept of "teletransportation" and how a scan/duplicate/ destroy approach to teletransportation has implications for theories of self that involve a "soul". Well, duh, to put it crudely. I've read tons of science fiction with more interesting hypothetical technology and species, considering only the concept of self and identity. I'm thinking Vinge's "tines" species for one, Iain Banks' "ascended" species for another. But of course, these are books that were written after Reasons and Persons. It would be quite interesting to read a similar book today from an author familiar with sci- fi tropes.
For example, Parfit very carefully explains the concept of "teletransportation" and how a scan/duplicate/ destroy approach to teletransportation has implications for theories of self that involve a "soul". Well, duh, to put it crudely. I've read tons of science fiction with more interesting hypothetical technology and species, considering only the concept of self and identity. I'm thinking Vinge's "tines" species for one, Iain Banks' "ascended" species for another. But of course, these are books that were written after Reasons and Persons. It would be quite interesting to read a similar book today from an author familiar with sci- fi tropes.