Ryan Schram's Anthrocyclopaedia

Anthropology presentations and learning resources

User Tools

Site Tools


personhood

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Next revision
Previous revision
Last revisionBoth sides next revision
personhood [2015/03/24 21:24] – created Ryan Schram (admin)personhood [2015/03/24 23:26] Ryan Schram (admin)
Line 1: Line 1:
 # Personhood # # Personhood #
  
-Debates about personhood are popping up all over! +Debates about **personhood** are popping up all over! 
  
 Eckholm, Erik. 2011. “Push for ‘Personhood’ Amendments Is New Tack in Abortion Fight.” The New York Times, October 25. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/26/us/politics/personhood-amendments-would-ban-nearly-all-abortions.html. Eckholm, Erik. 2011. “Push for ‘Personhood’ Amendments Is New Tack in Abortion Fight.” The New York Times, October 25. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/26/us/politics/personhood-amendments-would-ban-nearly-all-abortions.html.
Line 11: Line 11:
 Every culture has its own patterns and rhythms. There are rules people follow, social statuses that they occupy, and each person occupies a position in a social structure through these statuses. Every culture has its own patterns and rhythms. There are rules people follow, social statuses that they occupy, and each person occupies a position in a social structure through these statuses.
  
-But there's more to it than that, and that is *who* exactly these rules apply to. Who is able and capable of occupying a position in a social structureWell, people, right? While it may seem obvious, in fact this assumption that only biological human individuals occupy positions in a social structure is debatable. Many cultures deem certain kinds of beings as incapable of being social actors. Many other cultures extend this recognition to nonhumans and other beings that one might not consider to be people at all. The difference is one of personhood. Should animals have "human" rights? Should abortion be defined as the murder of an unborn citizen? When people debate these things, they are in fact debating the limits of personhood. +But there's more to it than that, and that is *who* exactly these rules apply to. Who is able and capable of occupying a position in a social structureWell, people, right? While it may seem obvious, in fact this assumption that only biological human individuals occupy positions in a social structure is debatable. Many cultures deem certain kinds of beings as incapable of being social actors. Many other cultures extend this recognition to nonhumans and other beings that one might not consider to be people at all. The difference is one of personhood. Should animals have "human" rights? Should abortion be defined as the murder of an unborn citizen? When people debate these things, they are in fact debating the limits of personhood. 
  
 [[Meyer Fortes]] defines personhood in a general way: A person is the culture's construction of the basic unit of society (Fortes 1987, 248). That is to say, to be a person is to occupy a unique position in a social structure, and every culture extends the boundaries of that category around some things and not others.  [[Meyer Fortes]] defines personhood in a general way: A person is the culture's construction of the basic unit of society (Fortes 1987, 248). That is to say, to be a person is to occupy a unique position in a social structure, and every culture extends the boundaries of that category around some things and not others. 
personhood.txt · Last modified: 2021/06/29 02:31 by 127.0.0.1