- seCtIon sIx: seLF AnD otHeR
PRoFILe 16.1
David Hume (1711–1776)
David Hume was born in Ed-
inburgh and studied law at
Edinburgh University, although
he never graduated. He tried
his hand at commerce in Bris-
tol, but nearly had a nervous
breakdown. In 1734 he moved
to France and there wrote his masterpiece, A Treatise of
Human Nature, in his mid-twenties. This long book was
not a great success, but the shortened version, An Enquiry
Concerning Human Understanding, became a classic. He
built on the empiricism founded by Locke and Berkeley
and wrote on causation, morals, and the existence of God.
Hume distinguished between ‘ideas’ and ‘impressions’
according to the force and liveliness with which they
make their way into consciousness. He reported that he
could never catch himself without a perception, and nev-
er found anything but the perceptions, which is why he
concluded that the self is not an entity but a ‘bundle of
sensations’.ego and bundle theories should not be confused with the dis-
tinction between dualism and monism or materialism. As we
shall see, many materialist scientists, while denying dualism, do
believe in a persisting self.
Bundle theories take their name from the philosophy of David
Hume, who argued in A Treatise of Human Nature (1739) that
we are nothing but a bundle or collection of different percep-
tions, which succeed each other with an inconceivable rapidity,
and are in a perpetual flux and movement. All our sensations,
impressions, and ideas seem to be tied together because mem-
ory gives them apparent continuity, and as such is the source
of personal identity. There is no additional unified entity that
experiences things or holds the experiences together. He wrote:
For my part, when I enter most intimately into what
I call myself, I always stumble on some particular
perception or other, of heat or cold, light or shade, love
or hatred, pain or pleasure. I never can catch myself at
any time without a perception, and never can observe
any thing but the perception.
(1739, Section VI)By staring deep into his own experience, Hume, like the Bud-
dha, seems to have discovered that there is no experiencer.
Not surprisingly, Hume’s ideas were unpopular, and his denial
of self was countered by the commonsense approach of his
fellow Scottish philosopher Thomas Reid, who protested: ‘I am
not thought, I am not action, I am not feeling: I am something‘I can never catch
myself ’
(Hume, 1739, Section VI)
that thinks, and acts, and suffers’ (1785, p. 318). The
thoughts and actions and feelings may come and go,
but the self or I to which they belong is permanent. In
other words, Reid appealed to ego theory.
These two views capture a fundamental split in the
way people think about the nature of self. On the
one hand, ego theorists believe in continuously
existing selves who are subjects of experience and
who think, act, and feel. On the other hand, bundle
theorists deny there is any such thing.
As Hume knew all too well, bundle theory is counter-
intuitive, for the non-existence of my self is difficult
even to contemplate. But there are many good
reasons at least to try. We will begin with some
extraordinary case histories challenging the natural
assumption that each human being has one con-
scious self.MULTIPLE PERSONALITY
On 17 January 1887, an itinerant preacher called
Ansel Bourne walked into a bank in Providence,
Rhode Island, withdrew $551, paid some bills, and
got into a horse-car bound for Pawtucket. Nothing
more was heard of him for two months. The local
papers advertised him as missing and the police
hunted in vain.
Two weeks later, a Mr A. J. Brown rented a small
shop in Norristown, Pennsylvania, stocked it with
stationery, confectionery, and fruit, and set up a
quiet trade. He went to Philadelphia to replenish his
stock, slept and cooked in the back room, regularly
attended church, and, according to neighbours,
was quiet, orderly, and ‘in no way queer’. Then, at
5 a.m. on 14 March he was woken by an explosion
to find himself feeling weak and afraid and in an
unfamiliar bed. Calling for help, he said his name
was Ansel Bourne, he knew nothing of Norristown
or shopkeeping, and the last thing he remembered
was taking money out of a bank in Providence. His
neighbours thought him insane and so, at first, did
the doctor. But, happily, they did as he asked and
telegraphed his nephew in Providence. A reply
came swiftly back and soon the Rev. Ansel Bourne
was taken home.Early in 1890 William James and Richard Hodgson
conceived the idea of hypnotising Bourne to see‘I am not thought, I am
not action, I am not
feeling: I am something
that thinks, and acts,
and suffers’
(Reid, 1785, p. 318)
PRACTICE 16.1
WHO IS CONSCIOUS NOW?As many times as you can, every day, ask yourself ‘Am I conscious now?’
You will probably be sure that you are, whether you are aware of walking
along the road, the room around you, or the music you are listening to. Now
turn your attention to whoever or whatever is having this experience. This
is presumably what Hume was doing when he made his famous realisation
about self. Can you see or feel or hear the experiencer, as opposed to
the experienced world? At first, you will probably be sure that there is an
experiencer, but it may be difficult to see any further. Keep looking. Keep
asking ‘Who is conscious now?’
This is not an easy exercise, but it will repay practising over many weeks or
months. Try to see whether there is a separation between the experienced
and the experiencer, and if so, what the experiencer is like. This practice
forms the basis of the next exercise as well.