Are There, Or Could There Be, Non-Human Persons?

Yes there possibly are, and there defiantly could bethe suit of flesh you inhabit then it seems logical that
non-human persons.one must only have the characteristics of
Firstly to establish non-human persons I feel I shouldpersonhood to be a person. Nothing else matters.
first clarify what a person is. It's very hard to defineAgain, as I stated above I don't believe there are
a person as to many it's a matter of perspective.non-human persons, answering the first half of the
Some believe that a person is simply being a memberinitial question. But the second half stating, 'could'
of the human race. Some believe that it's somethingthere be non-human persons needs to be addressed.
more; emotion, consciousness, intelligence and manyI believe there are two types of non-human persons
other aspects which set persons apart from- non-human animals, and non-human machines. So far
non-persons. Some believe that it is not our physicalI have moved logically to state that personhood is
body, but more our mind, our undisputed greatnessgained by obtaining certain attributes. Therefore, it
as a superior form of life apart from the animals.would be ridiculous to say that all animals or machines
Some believe it is our possession of a soul, but forare not persons. I think that at the moment there
now that notion will be left alongside the Bible, witchare no non-person animals or non-person machines,
burnings and all other out dated, ancient, barbaricbut that does not mean in the future they may not
notions. But enough about Christianity.exist.
If you believe like me, then a person is not a mereI want to move on to non-human animals specifically,
physical body branded a human being. But is thefirstly, I do not believe non-human animal persons
collection of certain specific and unique attributesexist. However, I do see the potential for them to at
within ones mind. Traits such as the ability to bothsome point exist in the future. Certain animals display
have emotion and show it. Exist as a consciouscertain signs of personhood, for example Great Apes
entity, and display a certain level of both intelligence,show use of basic tools, as does the Bonobo
awareness and communication. If these are thechimpanzee. However, though they show the
characteristics a person must display then indeed thepotential for personhood, and certain degrees of it.
vast overwhelming majority of humans are of courseThey are nowhere near being considered true
persons. But persons that have lost these particularpersons by our standard of the term. On the other
aspects are still humans - but non-persons.hand, the fact that we can say that they display
As it appears possible to indeed have a non-personcertain degrees of personhood implies they are part
human, it seems the next logical step that aof the way there. That though, admittedly there are
non-human person is indeed possible - and why not?currently no non-human animal persons, there is the
A non-human person by my understanding of apossibility of such. There could be aliens on other
defined person, does not at all need to haveplanets that are highly intelligent, more advanced and
membership of the human race. All it needs is to fulfillsuperior to us in every way, surely they are all
the categories stated above. However that is farpersons as we are? If not superior persons.
easier said then done, as merely determining if aAgain with addressing non-human animal persons, I
non-human has consciousness is an immensebelieve quite similarly, that though there are no
challenge.non-human machine/computer persons there is again
Non-person animals, In my opinion do not exist. Nowthe possibility. Since I have established that gaining
this isn't because these animals are not humans, butpersonhood is by acquiring certain attributes, then it
because the characteristics which turn a non-personseems computers simply have to gain these
into a person are not developed enough. There areattributes to become persons. A very difficult task.
of course animals that have certain aspects ofAgain as with animals, I believe that although there
personhood developed - but again not at the levelare no machine/computer persons, there is however
which distinguishes a person from a non-person. Forthe potential for persons. This answers the second
example the Black Leicester Longwool Sheep canhalf of the original question. Yes there COULD be
identify and retain individual faces, but it does notnon-human persons, I am not at all stating that there
have developed communication skills nor is it believedare, but again there is the potential for such to exist
to experience emotion. It has some aspects, but notnow or in the future. Some people may even
everything that is necessary.suggest humans, animals and all life are in fact
Some people, humans, believe in the contrary. Theremachines. Where as a car uses petrol, a mixture of
are two general standpoint; firstly there arehydrocarbons, we use a mixture of carbohydrates
absolutists that think there are non-persons that areand proteins, the car is made of metal we are made
animals or machines, or persons that are humans.of bones, the car has paint to protect underneath
There are no degrees of personhood for animals.and we have skin. Although we are constructed of
There is no belief that a great ape is half way todifference elements and compounds we are still
being a person, and an ant nowhere near themachines just as a car, and if we as machines can
pedestal of personhood - they're not persons at all.think and understand and be - why can't machines
The second is that while some animals may indeedthat why create not have these qualities?
show the characteristics of personhood they haven'tPeter Singer, a distinguished, yes controversial
and never will reach that level. Not only that, butphilosopher has an approach to personhood which
indeed the word human is intrinsic in the wordmany view as extreme. His general belief system is
person, and no matter how close an animal may, getthat there are some animals that have a greater right
they will never be a person.to life then some humans. This generally means that
In my opinion I believe it is true to state there are nothere are apes, or advanced animals, that he believes
non-human persons. However I believe there ishave a greater right to life then some severely
indeed the possibility of such, maybe in the future ormentally handicapped human beings. He sees a
maybe yet undiscovered. Just because there isgreater amount of personhood in certain animals then
nothing at the moment which we would consideredcertain humans, and I can totally understand this train
to be non-human persons, doesn't mean in the futureof thought. Surely there is more value in a healthy,
there wouldn't be such persons. For one example, inhighly intelligent ape that has a basic grasp or
what may be the very distant future. What if i waslanguage and knows it exists. Over a dying,
in a very serious car crash, and my body was totallyunintelligent human, that has not the intellect to
destroyed. Then via a highly advanced medicalspeak, does not know it exists, has no memory of
method, my body was cloned from my DNA, and mylife before being in this state and is soon to die. The
brain quickly implanted into that body. It's not justsituation can be paralleled by saying, would you rather
the same brain or a copy of me, it's mysave a healthy, intelligent sixteen year old boy, or a
consciousness inside of my cloned body. Nothingdying, mentally handicapped 16 year old boy. We
about me has changed, apart from my physical body.would all pick the first one as choosing it gives the
I believe everyone would considered I was still me,greater potential for a fulfilling life, we would place
and still a person. This is not where the body hasmore value on the first boy over the second. Singer
been cloned along with an identical mind - whichhas a similar situation, apart from they are not both
would mean a different conscioussness, even if thehumans, however, he believes that membership of
personality is the same. It is my actual memories andthe human race should not alone grant the right to
being inside of a body that though is not minelife, and that in fact certain animals should exist
orignally, is a literal, exact copy of mine.whereas the certain human should not.
I believe the conclusion for most people is that I amTo conclude, I do not believe that there are currently
still the same person. Then as a progressive step, itnon-human persons. But that does not mean there is
only seems that it is the brain or more exactly thenot the non-human person potential, and that in fact
consciousness of me is that which makes me athat there could be non-human persons in the future,
person. Then, if you indeed believe that it is youror yet undiscovered. Whether these are non-human
mind that that makes you a person, and not merelyanimals or non-human persons, only time will tell.