Evaluates Reid s and Butler s objections to Locke s memory criterion How could Locke respond
Reid・s and Butler・s objection seems to be valid and persuasive apparently. It is because they used the concept of contradiction to develop Locke・s idea into illogic. I do not blindly say which side is right or wrong as they have different interpretation and understanding of ：memory criterion； would lead to different results of analysis. ... However, they also left some loopholes in their inferences in every side, which allow Locke to give a counter response. ... In my opinion, Reid・s objection against Locke・s memory criterion is not comprehensive. ... To begin with, it is necessary to quote Reid・s example. That is ：an old man remembers being a brave officer in the army, so by the memory criterion the old man is the same person as the same person as the brave officer. The brave officer could remember being a young boy, stealing apples, so by the memory criterion the brave officer is the same person as the young boy. The old man does not remember being a young boy stealing apples, so by the memory criterion the old man is not the same person as the young boy. ... Locke has to argue is ：do not remember； equal to the ：loss； of memory? It seems that Reid and Locke have different interpretations of memory criterion. In my opinion, a ：loss； of memory is the memory of someone that totally disappears. In the case of ：do not remember； one・s memory is memory, which cannot remember temporarily but may have the chance to revive in the future, perhaps with certain kinds of stimulations. Therefore, if the definition of ：do not remember； is equal to ：totally disappear；, then Reid・s argument is correct. We could say the old man is not the same as the young boy base on Locke・s memory criterion.