<P> The "no - self theory" holds that the self cannot be reduced to a bundle because the concept of a self is incompatible with the idea of a bundle . Propositionally, the idea of a bundle implies the notion of bodily or psychological relations that do not in fact exist . James Giles, a principal exponent of this view, argues that the no - self or eliminativist theory and the bundle or reductionist theory agree about the non-existence of a substantive self . The reductionist theory, according to Giles, mistakenly resurrects the idea of the self in terms of various accounts about psychological relations . The no - self theory, on the other hand, "lets the self lie where it has fallen". This is because the no - self theory rejects all theories of the self, even the bundle theory . On Giles' reading, Hume is actually a no - self theorist and it is a mistake to attribute to him a reductionist view like the bundle theory . Hume's assertion that personal identity is a fiction supports this reading, according to Giles . </P> <P> The Buddhist view of personal identity is also a no - self theory rather than a reductionist theory, because the Buddha rejects attempts to reconstructions in terms of consciousness, feelings, or the body in notions of an eternal / permanent, unchanging Self since our thoughts, personalities and bodies are never the same from moment to moment . </P> <P> According to this line of criticism, the sense of self is an evolutionary artifact, which saves time in the circumstances it evolved for . But sense of self breaks down when considering some events such as memory loss, split personality disorder, brain damage, brainwashing, and various thought experiments . When presented with imperfections in the intuitive sense of self and the consequences to this concept which rely on the strict concept of self, a tendency to mend the concept occurs, possibly because of cognitive dissonance . </P>

Which of the following concept defines a social position that a person holds