7. Life after Death: John Hick on how Resurrection could be possible
- Created by: Alasdair
- Created on: 18-06-17 15:00
View mindmap
- 7. Life after Death: John Hick on how Resurrection could be possible
- John Hick’s ‘Death and Eternal Life’ (1976)
- Defence of Christian belief in resurrection
- Replica theory
- explains how resurrection is logically possible not that it necessarily happens (Why is this good/bad?)
- A person is a ‘psycho-physical unity’ (mind and matter
- Rejects Dualism
- materialist/monist
- only one substance, the mind is one with the body and are inseparable
- Unlike Materialism of Dawkins, Hick believes
that body can survive death
- as in resurrection
- so life is physical
- Why did Hick create the Replica Theory
- Soul
- expresses value of humans
- We are not expecting a ghostly substance to be saved, but our whole character
- Gilbert
Ryle criticised dualism for portraying this misconception
- “There is no ‘ghost in the machine’. All that needs to be said about us can be explained by reference to our physical selves”
- Soul
- Replica Theory
- Hick claims when a person dies a ‘replica’ is created somewhere else
- ‘Different space’
- Replica is 'exactly' similar to original
- Replica is not the same as a copy
- Replica can only exist in one place at a time
- Part of being individual so cannot have multiple copies
- Hick's 'thought experiment'
- 1.
- 1. John Smith suddenly disappears from his home in London
- 2. A person exactly similar immediately reappears in New York
- 3. Person in New York is exactly similar in bodily and mental characteristics, memory, fingerprints, stomach contents, beliefs and habits
- 4. They believe themselves to be John Smith
- 5. Would it be reasonable to call this person the same person as the one who disappeared?
- 2.
- 1. In this example, it is exactly the same as 1, except John Smith dies in London and is recreated in New York
- 2. Would it be reasonable to call this person the same person as the one who died?
- 3. Hick argues that the person in NY and a dead person exists in London, it is easier to identify with the replica in NY as the person rather than a dead body
- 4. Hick acknowledges this incident would be very odd but that is is reasonable to regard the Replica as the same person who died
- 5. This is because you know the person with their quirks, characteristics, memories, beliefs and stomach contents rather than a ‘dead body’
- 3.
- 1. The final case is exactly the same, except John Smith dies and reappears in a different world
- 2. The person would regard themselves as the same person as the one who had died
- 3. Like waking up from sleep in another place
- 4. Would it be reasonable to call this person the same person as the one who died?
- 1.
- Personal identity
- First stage of his argument is an example to explain ‘personal identity’ in support of his final conclusion for resurrection
- ‘Personal Identity’
- what makes you the person you are. Your
personhood. Your distinguishing features of a specific time in your life. If it
is certain things that make you who you are can these be replicated and that
person is still the original you?
- That is why he suggests: fingerprints, stomach
contents, memories and believing you are the same person
- does that mean your personal identity had been continued in another place?
- That is why he suggests: fingerprints, stomach
contents, memories and believing you are the same person
- what makes you the person you are. Your
personhood. Your distinguishing features of a specific time in your life. If it
is certain things that make you who you are can these be replicated and that
person is still the original you?
- Weaknesses
- A typical
question: what stage in life is the replica of?
- Hick suggests this is the main problem.
- One possibility might be that the healing of
illness takes place in the new existence as a replica.
- But then is that the same person? Is your
personal identity not scarred by disease or accident or death?
- Hick replies to say there are replicas then a ‘replica’ which is unique and therefore the only one
- But then is that the same person? Is your
personal identity not scarred by disease or accident or death?
- Peter Vardy argues about multiple replicas?
- Paul Davies argues that ‘exactly similar’ is no consolation. He argues that a replica would not be me.
- A typical
question: what stage in life is the replica of?
- John Hick’s ‘Death and Eternal Life’ (1976)
Comments
No comments have yet been made