lOMoARcPSD|21126671
Anthropology
Philosophy and Contemporary Ideas (Liberty
University)
lOMoARcPSD|21126671
Philosophical Anthropology
Definition: philosophical anthropology is the theoretical study of human
nature
Main Questions:
•Who am I?
•Is humanity special?
•What is the meaning of life?
•What is the nature of death?
The Problem of Personal Identity: Who am I?
Qualitative Identity versus Numerical
Identity:
Thoughts: the word “Same” has different meanings in different
contexts. Same could mean “we have the same truck!” meaning same
make, model, year, color, etc. (qualitative) or same could mean the
exact same thing literally (numerical) like when someone steals your
car/truck and you say “that’s my truck!” Versus when someone has the
same truck as you do and you say “that’s my truck!”
•Qualitative Identity: when two objects share all the same qualities
but are located in different places
•Numerical Identity: two qualitatively identical objects are located
in the exact same place (really one object)
Eight Theories of Personal Identity:
1. Qualitative Bodily Identity- two bodies are the same person if
they are qualitatively identical
lOMoARcPSD|21126671
2. Qualitative Mental Theory: two beings are the same person if
they have identical thoughts, beliefs, feelings and memories
3. Numerical Bodily Identity: two bodies are the same person if
they are numerically identical
4. Numerical Mental Identity: two beings are the same person if
they have numerically identical thoughts, feelings, beliefs and
memories
Problem with numerical mental identity: you likely had different
thoughts, feelings, beliefs and memories as a child than what you
have today but you’re still the same person
5. Bodily Continuity: two beings are the same person if they share
the same body but at different times
Problem with bodily continuity: we are essentially just our bodies if
this is true- so if dualism is true then this cannot be true
6. Mental Continuity: two beings are the same person if they
share the same thoughts, feelings, beliefs and memories over
time
Problems with Mental continuity theory:
- DID: more than one person in the same body?
- Duplicate persons
- Your child self does not necessarily have the same thoughts,
feelings, beliefs and memories as your adult self- but you’re
still you even though you grew up
7. Spiritual Continuity: the view that we are spirits, souls or
minds, something immaterial, inhabiting bodies but are not
identical to them. Therefore two beings are the same person
only if they are numerically identical in spirit
lOMoARcPSD|21126671
2
lOMoARcPSD|21126671
Objections:
•If you’re a physicalist, in regards to the mind-body problem, this
would not even be a legitimate option for you
•DID beings one person w/ plurality of personality would infer this
person as being more than one person inhabiting the same body,
more than one spirit in the same body
8. Personal Narrative Theory:
The view that two beings are the same person if their
personal histories are numerically identical
Objections:
•Identical twins do not begin to differ from each other until about
5 weeks into gestation but that cannot mean they’re the exact
same person up until then
Conclusion:
•The Christian view (spiritual continuity) seems to have the
strongest argument in this case
-least objections
-it’s strongest objection would be the physicalist being unable to
adopt it due to their view on the mind-body problem
•Naturalists cannot hold to spiritual continuity so they have to
choose 1-6 or 8, all of which have varying degrees of greater
weakness
•Philosophically speaking, theists have the upper hand on
personal identity as they can better define it without weaknesses
in the argument
3
lOMoARcPSD|21126671
Human Uniqueness:
Theories:
1. Upright posture: it used to be argued that b/c we stand erect, we
can use out hands for manipulating the world around us (but
many animals have this as well- not unique)
2. Opposable thumbs: we can grasp things better and better
manipulate tools and such (many animals have this as well-
not unique)
3. Use of tools: it has been argued that humans are special b/c we
use tools and create tools (animals have done this as well- not
unique)
4. Use of language: many animals can also do this, maybe not the
same way as humans but still a rudimentary version- not
unique
5. Intelligence: again, rudimentary but still there, not unique
6. Morality: it can be argued that animals have at least a
rudimentary sense of right and wrong- not unique- difference of
degree
7. Free Will: it can be argued that animals are able to make choices
and have a rudimentary version of free will so that’s still a
different in degree
8. Emotion: it can be argued that animals have feelings and
emotions too- difference of degree- not unique
9. Creativity: animals can be creative-not unique to humans
10. The soul: when a human dies and the body is no longer
animated that would mean the soul has left, could this also be
true of animals??
Pause: Difference in Degree vs. Difference in Kind:
Difference of degree: animals and humans can do a lot of the same
things, humans just have a more polished way of doing them while
animals can do a more rudimentary version (e.g. using/making
tools)
lOMoARcPSD|21126671
4
lOMoARcPSD|21126671
Difference of kind: refers to something unique to one kind-unique
to humans
Three Other Possibilities:
1. Humans are not unique
- Naturalists argue that we are just higher on the
evolutionary chain but the same as animals
2. Human uniqueness is a matter of degree rather than of kind
3. Human uniqueness comes from our position as stewards of
Go’s creation
-we are the only part of creation created in God’s image
(Imago dei)
-we are stewards of the universe “under-shepherds” (if you
will)
- because of our difference in degree, we are entrusted with
difference in kind, given by God
What is the Meaning of Life?
•What is the meaning of life? Is a complex question, meaning, it
assumes life has a meaning before asking “does life have
meaning?”
•Recall complex question fallacy: asking a question that
presupposes something that has not been proven or accepted by
all people involved
•Before you ask “what is the meaning of life?”, you must ask “does
life have meaning?”
•Or a better question might be “what is the purpose of life” or “why
do I exist?”
•Telos- Greek word for purpose or design
5
lOMoARcPSD|21126671
Extrinsic vs. Intrinsic Purpose:
•Extrinsic purpose is conferred on life by something else
•Intrinsic purpose would be inherent in life itself
•Purpose- the reason for which something exists
Positions:
•Nihilism: we do not have any intrinsic purpose, we are physical
beings who will one day die and be worm food
•Existentialism: there is no intrinsic meaning in life, but you can give
your life meaning by devoting it to a worthy cause (extrinsic
purpose) (e.g. abholition of poverty, world peace, cure cancer, etc.)
•Theism: you are here for a purpose, you are not a random accident,
you are part of God’s plan
Why are we here?
•Aristotle: to live virtuously
- Humans are unique from animals because we can reflect
on moral behavior and choose to live virtuously
•Thomas Morris: to love others
-to reflect the nature of God Himself through living lives of creativity
and love for others and ourselves
- we should reflect God’s nature- that’s our purpose
•Revelation 4:11- to give God pleasure
- Best answer b/c living virtuously and loving others both give
God pleasure so you can actually combine all of these
Death:
Responses to the Fear of Death:
•The natural process argument: death is a natural part of life; it
should not be feared any more than our birth or growing up
6
lOMoARcPSD|21126671
•The Necessity Argument: death is necessary for us to appreciate life,
just as darkness is necessary to appreciate light. Problems with this
include that God appreciates life even without fear of death. This
argument also fails to address the fear of the process of dying, the
fear of unfulfilled responsibilities, and the fear of postmortem
judgement
•The Agnostic Argument: we don’t know that eternity wont be
wonderful, so we shouldn’t jump to the conclusion that it will be
fearfully bad. This argument probably makes sense to someone
who thinks that we know nothing about what death is like, but
Christians believe that the Bible reveals at least some truths about
what death
will be like, so complete agnosticism about death is
unwarranted. Furthermore, this argument also fails to address
the fear of the process of dying and the other fears mentioned
previously.
•Epicurus’ Argument: the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus, who was
a materialist regarding the nature of reality and a physicalist on the
nature of the mind, argued that death cannot harm you, because
once you die, you no longer exist to be harmed. Death is complete
oblivion, and therefore should not be feared. This view actually makes
good
sense if you are a naturalist, since naturalism and physicalism go well
together, but it does not fit well with the Christian worldview. And of
course, it, too, fails to account for the fear of the process of dying
and the other fears previously mentioned.
These attempts to deal with the fear of death are only partially
successful at best. Perhaps rather than trying to overcome the fear of
death, it might be better to embrace death in the hope that there is
life on the other side of it. Here are some arguments that support
belief in life after death:
lOMoARcPSD|21126671
7
lOMoARcPSD|21126671
1. The argument from desire: the desire for immortality is innate,
innate desires reflect some need that can be expected to be met;
therefore the desire for immortality can be expected to be me.
This is a pretty abstract argument, but ask yourself this: what
purpose would an innate desire to escape death serve if there is
no way to do so? If there’s a God, why would he create us with a
desire that will always be thwarted? Or if evolution is true, what
purpose would a vain desire for immortality serve? Hmmmm,
that’s something to think about!
2. The argument from resurrections and near death experiences
(NDE’s): there are several examples of people in the Bible who died
and then were raised from the dead. (do you remember Lazarus,
who Jesus brought back to life?) There is evidence that some
contemporary people have died, while dead their spirits exited
their bodies, and then the spirit re-entered the body when the
body was resuscitated. (do you remember the story about the red
shoe on the roof of the hospital?) both of these strongly suggest
that life after physical death is possible.
3. The argument from communication with the dead: some people
have given evidence that they have communicated with the dead;
if anyone has communicated with the dead, then there must be
some sort of life after (or in) death. (Do you remember when King
Saul spoke to the dead prophet Samuel?)
8
lOMoARcPSD|21126671
Conclusion:
we are accustomed to look at death as something bad, as a curse.
And there are things about death that are scary. But perhaps we
should view death in a more positive light, as a doorway into an
even better existence. It is death, after all, that ushers one into
eternal life, into heaven, and into the very presence of God!-
Professor Jones
9
