A person’s identity is never affected by consequences. We can’t change who we are nor can anyone or anything else.
This hypothesis violates the principle of parsimony. The simplest and most economical explanation is that such memories are of other person’s lives. Occam’s Razor…
The legal definition presupposes a permanent identity regardless of nationality or any other consideration.
We are discussing the religious/philosophical nature of a person, not the legal definition. I am a UK national, so legally I am a subject of Her Majesty the Queen. That legal definition does not apply to citizens of America.The legal definition presupposes a permanent identity regardless of nationality or any other consideration.Here we disagree. A fixed identity is a reification, a projection of our unchanging internal model onto the changing external world. Such projection is an error and leads to suffering. We expect things to stay the same and we are upset when they change: “but you loved me when we married”.
The legal definition is not arbitrary but based on the fact that we never lose our identity or change into another person. Otherwise we wouldn’t be responsible for what we did one second ago! We should be given a different name whenever we cease to be the same person or we shouldn’t be given a name at all! The concept of responsibility becomes meaningless if we are constantly becoming different individuals.
Yes we can. Within Christianity conversion and repentance are obvious example of a person changing. At an even more fundamental level, a human soul has to change from unsaved to saved for salvation to be possible. For a Catholic, baptism has an effect on the soul; it changes the soul.
Conversion and repentance certainly don’t imply that we are utterly transformed in every respect and cease to be the same individual we were before. In fact time and space are totally irrelevant to our personal existence. You are “rossum” regardless of everything else. There has not been, is not or ever will be another “rossum”! You are unique in the history of mankind and should be proud of the fact instead of trying to multiply yourself into a chain of different individuals in order to conform to a Buddhist doctrine…
Baptism changes the soul to some extent but not entirely! If it did the past would be irrelevant and so would the future. Nothing would make sense because we would be atomised into a series of unrelated souls whose bodies and souls would have no significance whatsoever - and the ultimate result would be total extinction. …