Define: Person

[☭proletarian☭]

Is a 'person' an intelligent, logical human adult? A human with any measure of consciousness (self-awareness)?

What is a 'person' ? Can non-persons have rights? Can only humans be 'people'?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Is a 'person' an intelligent, logical human adult? A human with any measure of consciousness (self-awareness)?

What is a 'person' ? Can non-persons have rights? Can only humans be 'people'?

Only Humans at the moment are people. And it requires that to be termed a person. Babies are persons as well as unborn babies.

 

[TheSuaveOne]

Is a 'person' an intelligent, logical human adult? A human with any measure of consciousness (self-awareness)?

What is a 'person' ? Can non-persons have rights? Can only humans be 'people'?

Yep. Corporations have been deemed to have personage, and thus human rights...such as freedom of speech.

-TSO

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Is a 'person' an intelligent, logical human adult? A human with any measure of consciousness (self-awareness)?

What is a 'person' ? Can non-persons have rights? Can only humans be 'people'?

Only Humans at the moment are people. And it requires that to be termed a person. Babies are persons as well as unborn babies.

So a hypothetical race of intelligent extraterrestrials could never be 'persons'?

Can non-persons have rights?

Would a hypothetical deity with human-like thoughts be a 'person'? Would you interact with it as you would a person?

 

[G.T.]

Person was a word created by humans to describe humans. There's no real reason to look deeper into it based on that fact alone.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Is a 'person' an intelligent, logical human adult? A human with any measure of consciousness (self-awareness)?

What is a 'person' ? Can non-persons have rights? Can only humans be 'people'?

Only Humans at the moment are people. And it requires that to be termed a person. Babies are persons as well as unborn babies.

So a hypothetical race of intelligent extraterrestrials could never be 'persons'?

Can non-persons have rights?

Would a hypothetical deity with human-like thoughts be a 'person'? Would you interact with it as you would a person?

I said at the moment. Things could change. I seriously doubt any animals are likely to be made people though. Extraterrestrials probably.

 

[xotoxi]

Is a 'person' an intelligent, logical human adult? A human with any measure of consciousness (self-awareness)?

What is a 'person' ? Can non-persons have rights? Can only humans be 'people'?

Only Humans at the moment are people. And it requires that to be termed a person. Babies are persons as well as unborn babies.

What about a dead person?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Only Humans at the moment are people. And it requires that to be termed a person. Babies are persons as well as unborn babies.

So a hypothetical race of intelligent extraterrestrials could never be 'persons'?

Can non-persons have rights?

Would a hypothetical deity with human-like thoughts be a 'person'? Would you interact with it as you would a person?

I said at the moment. Things could change. I seriously doubt any animals are likely to be made people though. Extraterrestrials probably.

You're dodging.

What is a 'person'? What are the criteria such a race must meet?

 

[G.T.]

Question has no point. "People" who look for deeper meaning where no deeper meaning belongs are wasting their time. Language was created as a tool by human beings to communicate with one another, and person was a word to describe a human being, a homo sapien, and then philosophy and theology etc. (which obviously came *after said languages before being *written) developed their own spin-offs of the word.

I would bet a stack...........no..........I'd bet my package, that if I was able to go into a time machine and visit the birthtime of the word person, it was just an empty, simple gesture creasted to say "human."

 

[Cecilie1200]

We need to have a chat thread about the definition of a word now? Seriously? Definitely a sign that people are trying too damned hard to rationalize and justify themselves.

 

[Oddball]

Is a 'person' an intelligent, logical human adult? A human with any measure of consciousness (self-awareness)?

What is a 'person' ? Can non-persons have rights? Can only humans be 'people'?

Yep. Corporations have been deemed to have personage, and thus human rights...such as freedom of speech.

-TSO

Quite true. See: Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

However, corporations are not the only legal fictions granted legal "personhood" status, under the auspices of that ruling. Trusts, LLCs and gubmints themselves all are all "persons", for the purposes of statutory law.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

I would bet a stack...........no..........I'd bet my package, that if I was able to go into a time machine and visit the birthtime of the word person, it was just an empty, simple gesture creasted to say "human."

If the subject matter is so far over your head, I suggest keeping you mouth shut to avoid looking like a fool.

 

[G.T.]

I would bet a stack...........no..........I'd bet my package, that if I was able to go into a time machine and visit the birthtime of the word person, it was just an empty, simple gesture creasted to say "human."

If the subject matter is so far over your head, I suggest keeping you mouth shut to avoid looking like a fool.

I think it's over your head, on the contrary, that the word's creation was just a simplistic and pointed addition to language ........ not some evil genius creating the word to have 1,000 different philosophical or theological implications. Your attempt at a pointed conversation behind the meaning of a word can be broken down to two syllables: boredom.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

I think I'll not expect some wannabe rapper to comprehend philosophical matters.

 

[Polaris]

Question has no point. "People" who look for deeper meaning where no deeper meaning belongs are wasting their time. Language was created as a tool by human beings to communicate with one another, and person was a word to describe a human being, a homo sapien, and then philosophy and theology etc. (which obviously came *after said languages before being *written) developed their own spin-offs of the word.

I would bet a stack...........no..........I'd bet my package, that if I was able to go into a time machine and visit the birthtime of the word person, it was just an empty, simple gesture creasted to say "human."

Thinking your assumptions through is hard work, sometimes not much fun. We get it.

If the term person means just the same as human does, why then do we have two different words, here?

A little reflection makes it clear, I think, that the term 'person' is a moral category, and the term 'human' is a biological one. We are interested in what is a person, because it is persons that are the locus of our moral and ethical reflections, and legal stipulations.

A person is, essentially, a rights-bearing entity, one who we would typically hold had the capacity to function as a self-conscious, rational-moral actor. This property of being a "rights bearer," is not an function of the material being per se of the entity. So, you cannot open up a human being and point to where the "rights" are. Instead. rights, and the persons which are their bearers, are nonempirical (which is not to say, immaterial) phenomena.

Because 'person,' in contrast to 'human,' is a nonempirical phenomenon, we will find that being human is neither necessary nor sufficient for being a person. It is not sufficient, because in certain cases, a human can have lost all capacity to function as a rational-moral actor (in the case of severe brain trauma, let's say), and hence to have lost their personhood. It is not necessary, because it is entirely possible that the state of being a rational-moral actor can be reached by entities that are not homo sapiens sapiens.

The question of the OP is definitely a good one, and people here should take the time to think about it some more.

 

[G.T.]

If the term person means just the same as human does, why then do we have two different words, here?

A little reflection makes it clear, I think, that the term 'person' is a moral category, and the term 'human' is a biological one. We are interested in what is a person, because it is persons that are the locus of our moral and ethical reflections, and legal stipulations.

A person is, essentially, a rights-bearing entity, one who we would typically hold had the capacity to function as a self-conscious, rational-moral actor. This property of being a "rights bearer," is not an function of the material being per se of the entity. So, you cannot open up a human being and point to where the "rights" are. Instead. rights, and the persons which are their bearers, are nonempirical (which is not to say, immaterial) phenomena.

Because 'person,' in contrast to 'human,' is a nonempirical phenomenon, we will find that being human is neither necessary nor sufficient for being a person. It is not sufficient, because in certain cases, a human can have lost all capacity to function as a rational-moral actor (in the case of severe brain trauma, let's say), and hence to have lost their personhood. It is not necessary, because it is entirely possible that the state of being a rational-moral actor can be reached by entities that are not homo sapiens sapiens.

The question of the OP is definitely a good one, and people here should take the time to think about it some more.

This is all nice, but still thinking too deeply about it and assuming that the originator of the word was someone who did so to more clearly define which entities have morals and rights, etc.

You're clearly "assuming" this, and it's a frivolous exercise to do so.

Why more than one word? Gee, I don't know. Why is a Donkey an ass? Why is an ass a butt? Why is a butt a glutious maximus(sp?), why is a cheek a half of an ass? Why is an anus a butt hole? Why is there two words for anything in life? It's not that deep. Pseudo intellectuals sometimes go too far and to what end: the end is meaningless.

 

[G.T.]

I think I'll not expect some wannabe rapper to comprehend philosophical matters.

I'd match you wit for wit any time, and I'm not a wannabe anything. I am.

 

[G.T.]

ETA: The first 2-3 definitions in most dictionaries define it as a word to describe a human. The word human: right there in the definition.

It does not occur until the 5th-6th or later entries the philosophical and theological jibberish, which likely came AFTER the word itself was born simply to describe a human being.

 

[G.T.]

1. a human being, whether man, woman, or child: The table seats four persons. (#1 DEFINITION ---> PHYSICAL).
2. a human being as distinguished from an animal or a thing. (PHYSICAL)
3. Sociology. an individual human being, esp. with reference to his or her social relationships and behavioral patterns as conditioned by the culture. i.e. mail person, sports person, etc. (PHYSICAL)
4. Philosophy. a self-conscious or rational being.
5. the actual self or individual personality of a human being: You ought not to generalize, but to consider the person you are dealing with.
6. the body of a living human being, sometimes including the clothes being worn: He had no money on his person.
7. the body in its external aspect: an attractive person to look at.
8. a character, part, or role, as in a play or story.
9. an individual of distinction or importance.
10. a person not entitled to social recognition or respect.
11. Law. a human being (natural person) or a group of human beings, a corporation, a partnership, an estate, or other legal entity (artificial person or juristic person) recognized by law as having rights and duties.
12. Grammar. a category found in many languages that is used to distinguish between the speaker of an utterance and those to or about whom he or she is speaking. In English there are three persons in the pronouns, the first represented by I and we, the second by you, and the third by he, she, it, and they. Most verbs have distinct third person singular forms in the present tense, as writes; the verb be has, in addition, a first person singular form am.
13. Theology. any of the three hypostases or modes of being in the Trinity, namely the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

 

[G.T.]

rap·per 2 (rāp'ər)
n. Music
One who performs rap.