Person - Philosophical Concept | Alexandria
Person: A designation both profoundly simple and infinitely complex, referring to an individual capable of self-awareness, reason, and moral agency, seemingly self-evident, yet fraught with philosophical, ethical, and even legal ambiguities. What appears a straightforward concept conceals centuries of debate about its very essence.
References to the concept of "Person" can be traced back to ancient philosophical and legal texts. One of the most relevant icons of history relative to the concept of Person is Aristotle. The Latin term "persona" originally referred to the masks worn by actors in classical drama, denoting a role or character assumed for a specific purpose. As early as the 6th century, Boethius used the term to discuss the nature of Christ, defining "person is an individual substance of a rational nature." This theatrical origin invites reflection on the constructed nature of identity, suggesting we are all, in some ways, playing a part. Early legal codes used the term to denote those with rights and responsibilities under the law, effectively determining who was recognized as a full member of society—a recognition historically denied to slaves, women, and other marginalized groups. The philosophical and theological debates of the medieval and Renaissance periods witnessed intense discussions of personhood in relation to the Trinity and the nature of the soul.
The evolution of understanding "Person" has been dramatically shaped by Enlightenment thinkers, particularly Immanuel Kant, whose categorical imperative emphasized the inherent dignity of each individual as an end in themselves, rather than a means to an end. Existentialism, championed by figures like Jean-Paul Sartre, further emphasized individual freedom and responsibility, positing that existence precedes essence, and we define ourselves through our choices. Peter Singer, a contemporary utilitarian, has sparked debates on the moral status of animals and the obligations we have to alleviate suffering, forcing us to reconsider the boundaries of moral consideration. Even more recently, Judith Jarvis Thomson contributed to the conversation with works touching on trolley problem variations and the responsibility paradox. Questions such as "What defines a person?" or "When does personhood begin or end?" continue to fuel discussions in bioethics, particularly in debates surrounding abortion, euthanasia, and the ethics of genetic engineering. These discussions often involve examining ethics in AI, ethical dilemmas in medicine and morality game scenarios.
Today, the concept of Person retains its central place in debates about issues ranging from animal rights philosophy to the ethical obligations in AI, ethics of climate change, consequentialism, and social contract ethics. The rise of artificial intelligence and questions surrounding animal rights raise profound challenges to traditional definitions, forcing examination of topics from kantian ethics to non-cognitivism in ethics. Does consciousness equate to personhood? Can a corporation be considered a person under the law? Such contemporary reinterpretations underscore the enduring mystique of a concept that, despite its seeming simplicity, continues to challenge our understanding of what it means to be human – or indeed, what it means to be. Has the philosophical study of mind discovered all that it can about the nature of Person? Whether one champions utilitarianism, consequentialism, deontology, ethics of care, fairness test, justice theory or virtue ethics, the reader is invited to examine themselves and question what is at the core of their moral beliefs.