Marry Anne Warren's Personhood Argument

Marry Anne Warren’s infamous personhood argument lists 5 essential traits in order to be considered a person. These traits are: i. consciousness and capacity to feel pain, ii. reasoning, iii. self-motivated, iv. capacity to communicate, and v. presence of self-concept and self awareness. Warren continues to argue in favour that one is considered person if they possess at least one of these traits, for if they do not, they cannot be considered a person. It is clear that Warren is for the practice of abortion in this debate. But, Warren’s suggested traits are demoralizing, and discriminatory to those who do not possess these traits—not just to the unborn,— but even to the born. Take for example, those with communicative disabilities such as: global aphasia …show more content…
Warren’s arguments are discriminative towards those with the disabilities as well as similar ones mentioned above, and to those who are in commas since her traits do not reside with them. Morally speaking, it is wrong to even have labels and categories to consider one a person, for a person’s value and identity should not be based on or limited to five essential traits. Traits proposed by one person. But, should be based on their own definition of what makes them a person. In terms of the unborn child, though they may not be able to speak out loud on behalf of their life, it is morally right to give him/her an opportunity to prove themselves. To help support the claim that indeed the unborn is a person, John Noonan gives a scientific insight. Noonan argues that there is no clear line in distinguishing a person from a nonperson. For an unborn is considered a person from the point of conception as they possess the genetic code in which holds their genetic identity. I completely agree with Noonan because, a universal component in which everybody on this earth posses, is a genetic code. A genetic code is what brings us as humans to be