John Locke's Psychological Criterion for Personal Identification Timothy P. McKay Student: 250691978 John Locke's account of identity represented a radical rethinking on the topic of personal identity . Furthermore, his conception of personal identity has shaped modern thinking on the subject by placing emphasis on a psychological criterion. Locke argued that there is a distinction between the human being, the person and the soul, and that the identity of the person is based on the continuation of the same consciousness. In other words, Locke believed that personal identity remained if consciousness itself remained. However, upon publication, Locke was heavily criticized by those who argued that his use of the word "conscience" was too ambiguous. Some, such as Thomas Reid, interpreted Locke as equating consciousness with memory and, as a result of the fallible nature of memory, argued that Locke's explanation of personal identity failed. The purpose of this article is to explore Locke's account of personal identity and show that critics of Locke's account mistakenly hold an interpretation that equates consciousness with memory. The first section of this article will discuss Locke's account of personal identity as it appears in the text. Followed by section two which will discuss traditional interpretations of Locke's tale that equate memory with consciousness. Section two will rely primarily on Thomas Reid's "Gallant Officer" argument. Finally, section three will reflect on the first two sections and discuss why the memory criterion is wrong. implications it has for his account of moral responsibility Locke is concerned with an indi...... middle of paper ...... of personal identity. However, let us consider the following passage: If it were possible for the same Man to have a distinct and incommunicable consciousness at different times, there is no doubt that the same Man at different times would create different Persons. (II. xxvii. 20) Assuming that Locke agrees with Reid's gallant officer argument and that the student and the officer are distinct persons, then why would Locke question this possibility? Since Locke already admitted the fallibility of memory, if he really thought that personal identity consists in the continuity of memory he would also have to admit that new people are created every time an individual forgets an event. Once again, the use of "if possible" suggests that Locke means more than just ordinary memory. Finally, perhaps the most notable textual evidence for Locke's account of personal identity