Philosophy

Introduction
What separates humans from animals That question has long baffled philosophers, psychologists, and scientists alike, because the answers are both simple and complex that any one person can come up theories as to the elements that distinguish humans from other kinds of animals. (Petrinovich, 1998, p. 26) More than anything else, it is the ability to be deliberate in our choices and actions as we navigate the daily responsibilities of life. The ability to be guided by reason and free will and discern right and wrong separates us from animals.

This ability to differentiate and reflect between right and wrong is called personhood. The idea of personhood is something that is intimately tied with our collective consciousness and humanity, which explains why it can be very difficult to define, much less describe within certain parameters. The ideas behind personhood are the basis of fundamental human rights, humanitarian acts, as well as laws and regulations of an ordered society. Personhood may be defined as that innate capacity and right of a person for conscious deliberation and self-determination, based on proper reasoning. Personhood is not merely a function of genetic or organic existence. Much of personhood is an intangible concept that goes beyond simply being labeled as a living organism. Frankfurt (1971, p 6) defines a person as a creature with the capacity to fulfill needs and desires in ways that indicate free will and reasoning. The person is able to identify these needs and desires and acts in deliberation and free will in order to achieve such desires. The person, acting in such capacity, is fully aware of the motivations that lead him or her to such actions. A person is a unique creature and stands apart from other animals because humans have the ability to deliberate on desires and make the appropriate choices and actions based on their free will. The persons free will and reasoning enables him to make appropriate actions and whether to repress these desires or pursue its fulfillment. Unlike animals that are driven by instinct and basal needs, a person has the ability to exercise his free will and reason and make a choice on what actions to take. Raz (2006, p. 3) elevates the concept of personhood further to emphasize the role of reason in the exercise of free will. Raz maintains that it is reason that determines if an individual is truly using his free will or not. Given a variety of desires and needs, the person, guided by reason, decides on what desires to act on, if at all. The choices are based on the individuals ability to evaluate and prioritize desires and recognize motivations and ascribe to them values of right and wrong.

The idea of personhood is something that is intimately tied with our collective consciousness and humanity, which explains why it can be very difficult to define, much less describe within certain parameters. The ideas behind personhood are the basis of fundamental human rights, humanitarian acts, and holistic relationships. Personhood may be defined as that innate capacity and right of a person for conscious deliberation and self-determination, based on proper reasoning. Personhood is not merely a function of genetic or organic existence. Much of personhood is an intangible concept that goes beyond simply being labeled as a living organism. Frankfurt (--1971, p. 6) defines a person as a creature with the capacity to fulfill needs and desires in ways that indicate free will and reasoning. The person is able to identify these needs and desires and acts in deliberation and free will in order to achieve such desires. The person, acting in such capacity, is fully aware of the motivations that lead him or her to such actions. A person is a unique creature and stands apart from other animals because humans have the ability to deliberate on desires and make the appropriate choices and actions based on their free will. The persons free will and reasoning enables him to make appropriate actions and whether to repress these desires or pursue its fulfillment. Unlike animals that are driven by instinct and basal needs, a person has the ability to exercise his free will and reason and make a choice on what actions to take. Raz (2006, p. 3) elevates the concept of personhood further to emphasize the role of reason in the exercise of free will. Raz maintains that it is reason that determines if an individual is truly using his free will or not. Given a variety of desires and needs, the person, guided by reason, decides on what desires to act on, if at all. The choices are based on the individuals ability to evaluate and prioritize desires and recognize motivations and ascribe to them values of right and wrong. From these values we make the choices that we make and create a civilized and ordered society. However, the challenges of life create blurred lines between what is ethical and what is not.

Abortion and Personhood
Clearly, based on these definitions, personhood is an attempt to define the characteristics that allows us to determine whether an organism is a person or not. Simply, put three elements must be present for personhood free will, reasoning, and moral decisions. Our actions are constantly being judged as moral or not, and we have the choice whether to ascribe to these moral laws. Of course all of these actions, whether moral or not will then have consequences that the person must deal with. Why should there be a debate in the first place as to what renders a person a human being The debate is mainly a legal issue. Much of the legal laws that govern most societies are based on personhood and legal debate is also the basis whether an action is illegal or not.

One of the most enduring and controversial issues about personhood is the question of when it actually begins. The issue of personhood determines whether abortion is morally and legally right. Of course, people on both sides of the fence would arbitrarily argue that personhood is one thing or another, depending on what best suits their purpose. Those who are against abortion would argue that personhood begins during conception, while those on the opposite side would maintain that personhood cannot exist during the fetal stage and therefore, there is no actual act of violation.

This debate first came to a head in the watershed Roe vs. Wade (1973) case. The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the woman has the right to have an abortion up until a certain time when the fetus becomes viable. Viable in this case is defined as the period when the fetus has the potential to survive outside the womb, regardless of any medical or artificial assistance. This is generally considered to take place during the 6th or 7th month of fetal life. Abortions before this period of viability are then ruled to be permissible if needed to protect the womans health. The decision does not legalize abortion but allows it as long as the woman has an abortion before the fetus becomes viable and only for medical reasons.  

At the heart of the controversy and debate that continues to rage to this day is the respect for both the personhood of the mother and the baby inside her. If, by exercising her personhood, the woman decides to terminate the pregnancy, is she morally wrong or right What conditions make abortion legal and when is it not Of course, the much deeper issue that should be addressed is where do we go off deciding the viability of a fetus and the value of life The case created a deep schism and polarized a country between those who were pro-life (anti-abortion) and pro-choice (pro-abortion). The decision practically upheld abortion as a basic human right, and is protected by law as long as it is done with within certain narrowly-defined parameters. The womans decision to terminate her pregnancy falls under her right to privacy and personhood. She, being the owner of her body, has the right to deliberate and determine how she wants her own body to be. Roe was a rape victim who got pregnant as a result of the criminal act. She then wanted to have an abortion, arguing that the circumstances of her pregnancy give her moral and legal right to an abortion

Perhaps we shall never be able to fully deliberate on the morality and legality of abortion because at best, we can only speculate on the viability and personhood of a fetus. In such cases, the value of a human life is debated only when abortion becomes an option or when a legal case arises from it. In most cases, there seems to be a consensus that human life begins at the moment of conception and that personhood, as a process, begins also at this time.

Abortion and Murder
Clearly, based on these definitions, personhood is an attempt to define the characteristics that allows us to determine whether an organism is a person or not. Simply, put three elements must be present for personhood free will, reasoning, and moral decisions. Our actions are constantly being judged as moral or not, and we have the choice whether to ascribe to these moral laws. Of course all of these actions, whether moral or not will then have consequences that the person must deal with. Why should there be a debate in the first place as to what renders a person a human being The debate is mainly a legal issue. Much of the legal laws that govern most societies are based on personhood and legal debate is also the basis whether an action is illegal or not.

One of the most enduring and controversial issues about personhood is the question of when it actually begins. The issue of personhood determines whether stem cell research is morally and legally right. Of course, people on both sides of the fence would arbitrarily argue that personhood is one thing or another, depending on what best suits their purpose. Those who are against abortion would argue that personhood begins during conception, while those on the opposite side would maintain that personhood cannot exist during the fetal stage and therefore, there is no actual act of violation to the baby while in this stage. That there is an issue of murder when it comes to performing abortion is already proof that there is an ethical and moral issue that must be addressed. This careful analysis of an issue is already premeditated and the fact that abortion is performed in spite of all this, it is murder.

Conclusion
Perhaps we shall never be able to fully deliberate on the morality and legality of abortion because at best, we can only speculate on the viability and personhood of a fetus. In such cases, the value of a human life is debated only when abortion becomes an option or when a legal case arises from it. In most cases, there seems to be a consensus that human life begins at the moment of conception and that personhood, as a process, begins also at this time. The controversy of abortion and the challenges that it poses to our moral and ethical directions is a reflection of our exercise of personhood. It should be discussed and deliberated and questioned because the failure to do so is the failure of our own collective and individual humanity.

Whether the issue is abortion or informed consent, the bottom line is that personhood renders us with the inalienable right to deliberate and decide on a course of action. The conflict arises when there ones exercise of personhood goes to head with anothers right to do the same. In cases of abortion, the right of the woman over her own body must be weighed against the helpless and fragile life that she carries inside her. In the end, reason is the most important construct of personhood, and proper reasoning dictates that we take up the cause of the helpless, much as we should endeavor to protect the rights of the unborn child and the helpless patient.

Personhood is a process and an attribute that we must constantly choose to practice in order to ensure a civilized world.  In the absence of personhood, basal and primitive instincts may take over and blur our capacity for rational thought. As reasoning is the anchor of personhood, so must we consciously engage proper and moral reasoning in all aspects of our lives and not just use such reasoning only when it is convenient for us. This is true regardless of our vocation and belief system. Our personhood imbues us with universal values of right and wrong, and serves as our moral compass in a world where values can be easily lost.