Richard Hoppe
2/27/2013 11:34:14 am
In my opinion, I believe that one of Perry's main points was as long as you have a trace of hope in the idea of an afterlife than it makes dying easier. He supports this by say "hope provides comfort and hope does not always require probability" This quote meaning a slight chance is better than no chance at all.
Reply
Danny Brink
2/28/2013 02:30:42 am
I agree with Richard that one of Perry's main points is that dying becomes easier if you have even the smallest trace of hope in an afterlife. But Perry also introduces a counter-argument where miller believes that the body and the soul are completely separate.
Reply
Dana Cronin
2/27/2013 01:58:54 pm
John Perry presents two differing viewpoints on the concepts of personal identity and immortality and uses his two characters to represent the contrasting ideas. Weirob essentially disagrees with the concept that the "soul" is what determines personal identity. She also dismisses the idea of an afterlife. She uses hard facts and evidence to support her viewpoints. She believes that whatever is not physically proven cannot be true. On the other hand, Miller believes that one's "soul" determines their personality; i.e. their beliefs, actions, and opinions. He also believes that the soul lives on in the afterlife.
Reply
Lola Behrens
2/27/2013 02:23:43 pm
The dialogue unfolds as John Perry's character's, Gretchen Weirob and Sam Miller, discuss personal identity and the concept of immortality. Essentially, Miller presents Weirob with the ideas of the soul, and the concept of living beyond the grave, "with or without a body." He argues that there must be more to life than the short amount of time we are given, which is often full of sorrow and suffering. Furthermore, Miller makes it clear that he believes in a distinct separation between body and mind, and that they are "related but not identical." He believes that this is how we live continue to live on even after our body dies, because our soul is immortal. Weirob wholly disagrees with Miller's claims, and continuously counters his arguments. She believes that if something is supported by inference and belief, and not by solid facts and evidence, that it cannot be determined as true. In other words, she doesn't believe in an afterlife, or the separation of the "soul" from the body. In short, she has difficulty accepting the idea of the "soul," because it is tangible or provable.
Reply
Nicole LeMieux
2/27/2013 03:00:13 pm
Throughout John Perry's "A Dialogue on Personal Identity and Immortality," the relationship between one's soul and one's body is discussed. On her deathbed, Gretchen Weirob debates the relationship between her soul and body with her close friend, Dave Cohen. Weirob claims that the soul is constently evolving and does not cease this evolution until death, and Cohen counters this by stating that the soul remains essentially the same throughout life, and that it is through the soul that one may achieve immortality. He claims that the soul is what survives us after our bodies are gone. As the dialogue continues, both parties argue their points, and as Weirob refuses to believe in the soul's permanence because it cannot be physically acknowledged, Cohen is persistent in his belief that although it may not physically obvious, people's souls remain with them through eternity, while their bodies are temporary vessels.
Reply
Emily O'Kelly
2/28/2013 02:45:14 am
"A dialogue on personal identity and immortality" by John Perry is a convoluted dialogue between Gretchen Weirob, a woman on her death bed, and her two peers, Dave Cohen and Sam Miller. Their conversation consists of a discussion of a potential afterlife, whether the soul is part of the body, and an idea of self identity. I agree with Richard in that Weirob believes that if there is even a slight possibility of an afterlife, dying becomes easier to conceive. Weirob is clinging to the idea that there is a potential afterlife, or somewhere her soul is destined to go, and holds into this hope throughout the entire conversation. Although Miller tries to refute that an afterlife is "against the laws of science and physics", Weirob's opinion of hope is that it "doesn't need probability, just possibility." As for the idea of a soul, Weirob believes that a body does not determine a soul, but it is the soul that creates true self identity. With this opinion in mind, it is clear that Weirob believes her soul will surpass the coffin and break free from her body, which never really determined her self being anyway.
Reply
Georgia
2/28/2013 04:03:55 am
In this dialog between Weirob and Miller they discus the possibilities of the souls evolution transferring between one body to the next. They debate the possibility of an eternal soul that travels through the course of time from persons to persons. Miller holds steadfast believing that, given the insurance of god, that the soul will continue on even if the “prison” or body passes. Miller believes that after the person passes, the soul will continue and, in his mind, a thousand years from now the souls would/ could meet and it would be the same person with the same ideals, moral, and beliefs as the person a thousand years prior. However Gretchen Weirob, a philosopher, disputes Millers beliefs and spiritual ideologies that doesn’t seem to break through to her very literal wall. She allows him to speak his mind but she feels that his ideas are based more on the physical being and cant state with certainty that a soul, if in another body, is the same person as before. She feels that Millers ideology is simply an alleged speculations and surmised certain ideas. In the end Miller canton break though Weirobs philosophical barrier.
Reply
Marina Spadarotto
2/28/2013 11:46:46 am
John Perrys article highlights a dialogue between three friends, Sam Miller, Dave Cohen, and Gretchen Weirob. They all three share their different views on personal identity and the concept of immortality. Weirob is on a women on her deathbed, looking for assurance that her soul will live on beyond the death of her body. She believes that the science of things arent what matters, but the possibility that there is something that will long-live her soul. She sees that it may not be probable, but she is quickly approaching death which makes her eager for her friends to assure she will have something to look forward to after death of her body. She believes that a persons soul is habitually evolving, but doesnt completely change until death arrives. Although, her friend Cohen, believes the soul is perpetual element to the body and is not forever developing, but stay the same throughout life. He believes ghat the soul is what will lead a person to immortality because it is what motivates the mind and body. He belives that the body will die off, but a persons soul is eternal. Miller believes in a persons soul fundamentally living beyond the grave because life is too short to express all that the soul is capable of. As Lola said, he believes the that the body and mind are "related but not identical".
Reply
Kile
3/14/2013 06:34:42 am
Although i do not completely believe in John Perrys ideals ,as far as the idea of the soul traveling on forever goes . However i do agree thats the body and mind or soul are different and seperate entities but relate to each other .I believe that even though the soul is completely seperate from the body and internal soul , i disagree with the idea that the soul floats on forever , because this goes against my Phylosophy that the Soul has some type of purpose beyond death .
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
May 2015
Categories |
Photo used under Creative Commons from Dano