I will argue that Locke believed that if you remain the same person, there are various entities contained in my composite of body and soul that do not remain the same over time, or that we can imagine them changing. These entities are matter, the organism (human), the person (rational consciousness and memory) and the soul (immaterial thinking substance). This is an intuitive interpretation that creates many questions and problems. I will evaluate Locke's view by explaining what personal identity is and what forms, and then explaining how these changes can occur while a human being remains the same person. Locke believed that a person's identity could be assigned to consciousness. He thought that a person would remain the same as long as his consciousness continues to be the same throughout his life: “Consciousness always accompanies thought and causes everyone to be what he calls 'self' and therefore stands out from all other thinking things; only in this does personal identity consist, that is, the identity of a rational being; and to the extent that this consciousness can be extended backward to any past action or thought, it reaches as far as that person's identity” (Essay II.xxvii.9). Locke believes that your body and personality do not determine your identity. Instead, you can know that a person is the same person as long as his consciousness continues to be the same throughout his life. Locke believed that a person's identity has the identity of consciousness: “That which makes a man be himself to himself is the identity of consciousness, therefore personal identity depends entirely on this: whether consciousness is it completely tied to one substance or rather continuous in a series of different paper media... is it in a coma, so when they wake up and don't remember anything, can they still be considered a different person? As they slowly begin to remember things, but not everything, is their consciousness becoming different, are they forming a new identity as they begin to remember things? Another example would be if there was a car painted red, also moving while moving on the highway. Suddenly it breaks down due to some malfunction and it also starts raining. The rain washes away the red paint, turning the car white. Does it become a completely different car now that it is no longer moving and its color has changed? The car itself is still fit for its purpose (driving it) and capable, given the certain conditions. So is the car completely different now or is it still the same car? This is something that can be questioned from Locke's point of view.