On personhood

[F0rmsh1fter]

As per Oxford, the requirements of personhood are as follows: Personhood typically requires certain capacities such as consciousness, self-awareness, rationality, and the ability to engage in moral agency. These traits are often tied to legal rights and moral considerations, making the definition of personhood complex and context-dependent.

Based on these criteria, a large percentage of the population does not qualify, or at least appears not to. Why then do we -predominantly in western countries- operate under the disproportionately equitable assumption that all men are created equal? The allotment of rights as a blanket vs merit based I feel is detrimental to society and our species as a whole.

This is not to say that anyone is objectively superior to anyone else in general (though everyone is better at something than someone else and vice versa. For instance Floyd mayweather could beat me in a boxing match, but I can read a novel), but why is it that person a, who is incapable of critical thought and lacks any sort of moral substance should be afforded the same rights and freedoms as person b who is thoughtful and intelligent? This seems wildly unfair as equity is by definition, but the detriment it brings with it is hardly overcome by any value such a system adds. I’m hoping for meaningful philosophical debate with thoughtful responses, but I fear the majority will be person a type discourse

Thanks for coming to my TEDtalk