/lit/ - Literature

The anon that takes issue with the idea of transcendent personhood bestowed upon all humans regardless of their subjective experience or physiological capability is missing the elephant in the room. Anon, if you believe there is a cut off point beyond which beings are persons, and this point is defined as some state of advanced subjectivity and physiological capability, why apply personhood only to mature humans? It's inconsistent to get up in arms about the other anon appealing to an imaginary fiction if you still cling to one in your argument for the acquisition- as opposed to intrinsic possession- of personhood. There's good evidence to support the similarity of higher brain function across all mammals. Do you think any animals have status as persons? Or some kind of diminished personhood, as Singer argues?