Research On Parfit’s Hominology Thought

Derek Parfit and his works Reasons and Persons, On What Matter have a great influence on western philosophy, especially on western ethics. But there is scarcely any research on Parfit and his thoughts in Chinese academic circles. It is of great theoretical and practical significance to research the Parfit’s hominology thought by making a comparison with Marxist hominology.Parfit makes “reasons” and “rationality” as the cornerstone of his philosophy. He believes that reasons for acting all derive their force from the facts that give us reasons to have certain desires and aims. Such reasons is object-given. Parfit discusses the Self-interest Theory(S) and Consequentialism(C) about reasons for acting. He argues that both S and C are self-defeating, so we should reject S and C by accepting the Present-aim Theory(P), especially the Critical Present-aim Theory(CP). Parfit try to scan various theories of moral philosophy hoping to find the real reasons for acting and the highest moral principles. After the analysis of Kantianism, Contractualism and Consequentialism, Parfit argues that these three types of ethical theorists are all climbing the same mountain on different sides to seek the highest moral principle. In addition, Parfit also pay special attention to the human beings, human history and the future generations.There are rich hominology thoughts in Parfit’s philosophy, such as the overall understanding of human beings and the ideas of “personal identity”,people’s rights and obligations, the people’s desire and belief, the personality and dignity, and the interests of the people and the development of people and so on. Parfit believes that we are the animals, maybe the only rational beings in the Universe, that can both understand and respond to reasons. He believes that a person is not the kind of separately existing entity which is distinct from the brain and body. He also thinks that people have some kind of absolute importance and it is wrong to regard any person as a mere instrument or tool.The theory of “personal identity” is the core of Parfit’s hominology. Parfit argues that personal identity exists in non-branching psychological connectedness and/or psychological continuity which is relatived to persons who are not separately existing entities. The connectedness and/or psychological continuity can be copied or transfered.The life body or individual human existence does not mean personal identity. Relation R is what matters. R is psychological connectedness and/or psychological continuity with the right kind of cause. Our identity is not always determinate. It is determinate only when the certain cause and effect bring the continuous experience and the consistent psychological reflection to the individual person. Otherwise the personal identity is not determinate.It is not irrational to care less about my further future if I have a discount rate with respect to the degrees of psychological connectedness. If we change the view of personal identity, we will also change our moral views. Parfit rejects Non-reductionism and thinks that Reductionism is true. Parfit does not regard a person as the changeless and abstract person. He build the metaphysical basis for the altruistic behavior. These are worthy of reference.By tracing the origin of Parfit’s hominology thought, we can find its “ancestors”: the ancient Greek philosophers’ conscious of rational self, Descartes and Kant’s thought about subjectivity, Hume and Locke’s debate about “personal identity” and so on. We can also find its “relatives”: Heidegger and Sartre’s existentialism hominology, and Frankfurt school’s concept of “overall human”. Like existentialists and Frankfurt school,Parfit does not eliminate the abstractness of metaphysics, but he makes progress on the demonstrating methods.Acording to Marxist hominology, we know that human nature is a multi-level and multi-factor system, and that the essence of human beings is the sum total of all the social relations. Parfit’s “rational beings” does not meet with the essence of human beings. He distorted human nature and characteristics by his deconstruction. Parfit analyzes a person’s continuous exist without considering people’s social existence, as well as he loses sight of the unity of natural existence, spirit existence and social existence. His attention to the “future generations” is also narrow so that his“development of the future generations” is not Marx’s “all-round free development”.Parfit’s improvement of method is not enough to go beyond Idealistic Historicism or Reductionism.In addition to the research on the Parfit’s hominology thought by making a comparison with Marxist hominology, we also should study on other western philosophies and western hominology thoughts. Only Marxist hominology is inherited and developed based on the reality, can we have better guide to the hominology practice in the economic, political, cultural, social, and other fields.