ABSTRACT
Commitment continuity is an empirical relation. So the commitment criterion obviously fulfi lls the fi rst criterion of adequacy. Nevertheless, I would like to explain briefl y how the commitment criterion accounts for identity in the coma case. There is a difference between the coma case and the story of the different attitudes about the relative beauty of different buildings in the course of a day. Only in the latter case is the person capable of uttering her views or otherwise expressing them. Does it at all make sense to say that a person in a coma has commitments? And if not, doesn’t the commitment criterion lack the means to explain how through coma a fundamental entity remains one and the same?
