The Russian Nobleman
-
- Posts: 223
- Joined: June 9th, 2021, 12:39 am
The Russian Nobleman
At the time, he argues these core beliefs are an essential part of him, stating: “If I lose these ideals, I want you to think that I cease to exist.”
Now suppose 50 years later, he changes his mind and asks his wife to revoke the documents. The wife made a promise to the young nobleman. Is the old nobleman, with all his memories and new beliefs, the same person as the young nobleman? What should she do?
This is a question of personal identity. Derek Parfit makes us question what it means to be human, and what our promises mean in the future.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: The Russian Nobleman
Great question. The answer lies in the perspective of the questioner. If legal, the old nobleman (assuming he is legally competent) is the same man as the young nobleman. From the perspective of wisdom/experience, the old nobleman is different from his younger self. This happens to be the perspective the nobleman himself used, hence why he arranged for his wife's backup plan. Thus if she is acting as he (the young nobleman) intended, she should honor the original plan as arranged upon.WanderingGaze22 wrote: ↑January 17th, 2022, 3:44 am A young Russian nobleman intends to give his estate to peasants upon inheriting them. He also realizes that over time, his ideals might fade. Thus, he puts his ideas down into a legal document that can only be revoked by his wife. He makes her promise not to consent if he changes his mind later on.
At the time, he argues these core beliefs are an essential part of him, stating: “If I lose these ideals, I want you to think that I cease to exist.”
Now suppose 50 years later, he changes his mind and asks his wife to revoke the documents. The wife made a promise to the young nobleman. Is the old nobleman, with all his memories and new beliefs, the same person as the young nobleman? What should she do?
This is a question of personal identity. Derek Parfit makes us question what it means to be human, and what our promises mean in the future.
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7092
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: The Russian Nobleman
If he meant it then why wait 50 years? WHy not do it immeditely?WanderingGaze22 wrote: ↑January 17th, 2022, 3:44 am A young Russian nobleman intends to give his estate to peasants upon inheriting them. He also realizes that over time, his ideals might fade. Thus, he puts his ideas down into a legal document that can only be revoked by his wife. He makes her promise not to consent if he changes his mind later on.
At the time, he argues these core beliefs are an essential part of him, stating: “If I lose these ideals, I want you to think that I cease to exist.”
Now suppose 50 years later, he changes his mind and asks his wife to revoke the documents. The wife made a promise to the young nobleman. Is the old nobleman, with all his memories and new beliefs, the same person as the young nobleman? What should she do?
This is a question of personal identity. Derek Parfit makes us question what it means to be human, and what our promises mean in the future.
- chewybrian
- Posts: 1594
- Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
- Location: Florida man
Re: The Russian Nobleman
Sartre's warning in "No Exit" comes to mind: "hell is other people". Part of what he meant is that we should take care to treat others as subjects rather than objects, and part of that is understanding that they are not static. We have to allow them the same room to grow and change and, hopefully, get better which we would want them to allow us. If we form an opinion of them and hold fast to it, this is one way in which hell is other people. If the nobleman could go back in time as his new self, he would not ask his wife to make that bargain. She should recognize this and respect the new nobleman rather than the old one.
-
- Posts: 223
- Joined: June 9th, 2021, 12:39 am
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7092
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: The Russian Nobleman
So he was never honest about his intentions in the first place, as the seeds of his later self were inherent in his thinking from the start.WanderingGaze22 wrote: ↑January 18th, 2022, 4:39 amBecause he could end up experiencing a life-changing decision in those 50 years and change his will to not have the peasants inherit like he planned to in his youth.
If he had honestly wanted to distribute his wealth then he could have included a provision to protect the rest of his own life such as handing over all the land but retaining a small leasehold on the usage, to provide for his minimum needs.
For this reason I do not think that the hypothetical is valid.
In each of us there is an indelible nature only terminated by death. Though we may change throughout ourlives, we maintain a core of that nature.
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: The Russian Nobleman
Is it the same person? The only one who can answer that question is the wife who has grown old with him and heard, seen, understood, celebrated with him every triumph and nursed him through every vicissitude. She - and she alone - knows the right thing to do. he was wise to entrust the decision to her. It must have been a very good marriage.WanderingGaze22 wrote: ↑January 17th, 2022, 3:44 am A young Russian nobleman intends to give his estate to peasants upon inheriting them. He also realizes that over time, his ideals might fade. Thus, he puts his ideas down into a legal document that can only be revoked by his wife. He makes her promise not to consent if he changes his mind later on.
At the time, he argues these core beliefs are an essential part of him, stating: “If I lose these ideals, I want you to think that I cease to exist.”
Now suppose 50 years later, he changes his mind and asks his wife to revoke the documents. The wife made a promise to the young nobleman. Is the old nobleman, with all his memories and new beliefs, the same person as the young nobleman? What should she do?
This is a question of personal identity. Derek Parfit makes us question what it means to be human, and what our promises mean in the future.
-
- Posts: 223
- Joined: June 9th, 2021, 12:39 am
Re: The Russian Nobleman
Technically, he was uncertain on what would happen 50 years from now. He knew he would have to give up his estate, but he did not know who to give it to. The peasants seemed like an ideal choice at the time, but he could have just as easily given it to the government. Yes, he wasn't honest with his intentions, but he was certain enough to make the peasants heirs to his land.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑January 18th, 2022, 7:58 amSo he was never honest about his intentions in the first place, as the seeds of his later self were inherent in his thinking from the start.WanderingGaze22 wrote: ↑January 18th, 2022, 4:39 amBecause he could end up experiencing a life-changing decision in those 50 years and change his will to not have the peasants inherit like he planned to in his youth.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: The Russian Nobleman
The wife is at fault if she refuses the old nobleman's request. Times change and nobody is the same person as they were five minutes ago, let alone 50 years ago. DNA, teeth, and thumbprints aside, the lapse of 50 years means the old nobleman and the young noble man are different brain-minds and different bodies proper.WanderingGaze22 wrote: ↑January 17th, 2022, 3:44 am A young Russian nobleman intends to give his estate to peasants upon inheriting them. He also realizes that over time, his ideals might fade. Thus, he puts his ideas down into a legal document that can only be revoked by his wife. He makes her promise not to consent if he changes his mind later on.
At the time, he argues these core beliefs are an essential part of him, stating: “If I lose these ideals, I want you to think that I cease to exist.”
Now suppose 50 years later, he changes his mind and asks his wife to revoke the documents. The wife made a promise to the young nobleman. Is the old nobleman, with all his memories and new beliefs, the same person as the young nobleman? What should she do?
This is a question of personal identity. Derek Parfit makes us question what it means to be human, and what our promises mean in the future.
Promises are not about personal identity they are about efforts to crystallise a state of affairs for the sake people's peace of mind in a stable society. But sometimes as in the case of the Russian nobleman it's best to face the truth: nothing endures.
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7092
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: The Russian Nobleman
But the question remains begging. If he was so keen, why not take steps to hand over th estate and manage the transition whilst keeping his own subsistence secure?WanderingGaze22 wrote: ↑January 19th, 2022, 5:11 amTechnically, he was uncertain on what would happen 50 years from now. He knew he would have to give up his estate, but he did not know who to give it to. The peasants seemed like an ideal choice at the time, but he could have just as easily given it to the government. Yes, he wasn't honest with his intentions, but he was certain enough to make the peasants heirs to his land.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑January 18th, 2022, 7:58 amSo he was never honest about his intentions in the first place, as the seeds of his later self were inherent in his thinking from the start.WanderingGaze22 wrote: ↑January 18th, 2022, 4:39 amBecause he could end up experiencing a life-changing decision in those 50 years and change his will to not have the peasants inherit like he planned to in his youth.
What you are doing is trying to instigate a Buriden's Ass paradox, by positing two distinct time points and comparing what would seem to be a contradiction. But Buriden's Ass paradox is solved in the same way this one is, by the simple recognistion that reality is a continual process and not two distinct reference points.
- Elephant
- Posts: 86
- Joined: February 1st, 2022, 1:32 am
Re: The Russian Nobleman
This is a nuance in moral reasoning. The idea is for us to reason why a promise could or should be broken, or be honored. I believe this scenario was raised to test how well-developed one's moral reasoning is. I am on the side of re-evaluating the situation and giving the benefit of the doubt for the person making the request -- the husband. So, the task of the wife is to re-evaluate the promise made and conditions fifty years ago.WanderingGaze22 wrote: ↑January 17th, 2022, 3:44 am
This is a question of personal identity. Derek Parfit makes us question what it means to be human, and what our promises mean in the future.
To me, the lesson is, if your view and personality did not change since fifty years ago, then you didn't learn from human interaction, you didn't learn about yourself, you didn't grow your emotions, and you failed to understand why a change of heart or mind is necessary sometimes. The wife must evaluate for herself why she must break her promise. Do not rely on the situation 50 years ago.
If I were the wife, I could go either way -- break my promise or not break my promise depending on how I think of the situation in the past compared to now. With or without the written documents, I will re-evaluate my thinking.
- Haso
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 1
- Joined: March 26th, 2022, 10:43 am
Re: The Russian Nobleman
The nobleman make the committment because he was worried that his ideals might fade. He saw these ideals as being immensely important to his life (so much so that they are what made life worthwhile).
What does it mean to be a good spouse in this context? An important aspect of being a good spouse is to support support your partner in becoming their best self. Ultimately, this is a question of - when he is at his best - what does he aspire to be?
For example, we can imagine that he had been committted to these revolutionary ideals for several decades, and that his life had intend been defined by these ideals. We can imagine that his belief in these ideals haven't really changed, but it is only his will that has weakened. On the other hand, we can imagine that the husband was generally rash, and held his revolutionary ideas only in passing. In his old age, he reflected on his former ideas and realised sincerely that they were naive and wrong.
This provides a framework within which the husband can make an argument to his wife. Who does his husband want to be, and what action serves this best? Her role is to puzzle this out with him, which she well-placed to do as his wife: after all, she knows his heart best. If she is not persuaded, she might ask that they return to this argument again in several years - over time, his reasons for the change might become more clear to himself too.
There is a lot here that is imprecise. What is your "best self"? When are you "at your best" when working out what you aspire to be? We can't provide universal answers for these, but I think if we reflect on our own lives we will see these concepts are workable. Ask your spouse and your friends what kind of life you would have to live for you to be supremely content - and if you agree with what they say, that is probably it. And that can change, of course - but again, reflecting on our own lives, we can able to debate coherently whether you is changing because you are developing, or because you are becoming more fearful.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: The Russian Nobleman
His actual words are emotional blackmail and his egotistic attempt to exist after his death. While I agree with the Russian Nobleman's political sympathy with the peasants, and his wife and all the world may honour him for his political morality, the fact remains that when he is dead he is dead.
When a living being is deceased there is nothing left but a lump of clay with no more freedom than a clod. Only the living can possibly shoulder the responsibility to make decisions.
Naturally the widow and others will , as the saying goes, 'keep alive' the sentiments of a good man of sound reputation. However conservation of the Russian Nobleman's moral and political principles is also the responsibility of the living.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: The Russian Nobleman
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023