Skip to main content
Book cover

Persons pp 74–93Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Person and Self

  • Chapter
  • 8 Accesses

Abstract

Ascription of psychological predicates involves reference to the beliefs, values and purposes of the agent. Thus psychological knowledge is founded on the agent’s avowals, whereby he exercises a power, bestowed on him by his fellow agents who recognise his privileged authority to establish by declaration the significance, for him, of what is happening to him and what he is doing in response. In so avowing, to himself or to others, he declares his reasons in terms of which his actions can be understood and evaluated. He ‘explains himself’, to himself as well as to others. It follows that, to be a psychological subject, i.e. a rational agent, one must be capable of self-consciousness ; one must have a ‘self’ to explain. What kind of creature is capable of such agency, and what kind of entity is the ‘self’ he must have and be aware of? We call such an agent a person. What then is it to be a person, and what is it to have a self?

‘… only of a living human being and what resembles (behaves like) a living human being can one say: it has sensations; it sees; is blind; hears; is deaf; is conscious or unconscious’ — Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. A. J. Ayer, The Concept of a Person and other Essays (New York: St Martin’s Press, 1963) p. 95: ‘But what exactly is meant here by saying that a criterion is logically adequate? Not that the evidence entails the conclusion, for in that case we should not stop short of physicalism. Not that the evidence provides sufficient empirical support for the conclusion, for then the reasoning is inductive; we are back with the argument from analogy. What is envisaged is something between the two but what can this be? What other possibility remains?’

    Book  Google Scholar 

  2. R. Carnap, ‘Testability and Meaning’, Philosophy of Science, 3 (1963) p 1 .

    Google Scholar 

  3. R. M. Hare, The Language of Morals (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1952) ch. 11

    Google Scholar 

  4. W. B. Gallie, ‘Essentially Contested Conceps’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 56 (1956).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cf. A. C. Danto, ‘Human Nature and Natural Law’, in Law and Philosop hy, ed. S. Hook (New York: University Press, 1964).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Shoemaker, op. cit.; T. Penelhum, Survival and Disembodied Existence (New York: Humanities Press, 1970).

    Google Scholar 

  7. R. D. Laing, ‘Ontological Insecurity’, in Psychoanalysis and Existential Philosophy, éd. H. M. Ruitenbeek (New York: Dutton, 1962).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Copyright information

© 1977 Raziel Abelson

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Abelson, R. (1977). Person and Self. In: Persons. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-81496-1_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-81496-1_6

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-349-81498-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-349-81496-1

  • eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics