You are the same person as 3 years ago, because you remember being that person (not only rationally, but on a deeper level of knowing and feeling that you were that person)
Two things:
1) Can you clarify what you mean by “rationally remembering” here?
2) If you’re actually talking about “knowing and feeling that I am that person,” then you aren’t talking about memory at all. There are many, many events that I do not remember, but which I “know and feel” I was involved in—my birth, for example.
If you define my “personal identity” as including those things, that’s OK with me… I do, as well… but it’s not clear to me that there’s a sharp line between saying that, and saying that my “personal identity” can include events at which my body was not present but which I “know and feel” I was involved in.
(Just to be clear: I’m not suggesting anything mystical here. I’m talking about the psychological constituents of identity.)
I’m not sure there’s anything to say about that other than, if I do identify with those things, then those things are part of my identity.
To put that more affirmitively: if personal identity is a matter of what I “know and feel,” then it is a psychological construct very much like cultural identity and family identity, and those constructs flow into one another with no sharp dividing lines, and therefore discussions of where “personal identity” ends and “cultural identity” begins is entirely a discussion of how we choose to define those terms, not actually a discussion about their referents.
Two things:
1) Can you clarify what you mean by “rationally remembering” here?
2) If you’re actually talking about “knowing and feeling that I am that person,” then you aren’t talking about memory at all. There are many, many events that I do not remember, but which I “know and feel” I was involved in—my birth, for example.
If you define my “personal identity” as including those things, that’s OK with me… I do, as well… but it’s not clear to me that there’s a sharp line between saying that, and saying that my “personal identity” can include events at which my body was not present but which I “know and feel” I was involved in.
(Just to be clear: I’m not suggesting anything mystical here. I’m talking about the psychological constituents of identity.)
I’m not sure there’s anything to say about that other than, if I do identify with those things, then those things are part of my identity.
To put that more affirmitively: if personal identity is a matter of what I “know and feel,” then it is a psychological construct very much like cultural identity and family identity, and those constructs flow into one another with no sharp dividing lines, and therefore discussions of where “personal identity” ends and “cultural identity” begins is entirely a discussion of how we choose to define those terms, not actually a discussion about their referents.