Key Idea: Topic 1.4 pulls apart two words we usually run together: human being (a species) and person (a status — a being that can think, choose and be held responsible). Personhood is one of the strongest issues to reach for in Paper 1 Section A, the 25-mark essay on what it is to be human. This whole topic feeds it.
🧠 The five big questions, one card each
Topic 1.4 at a glance
- 1.4.1 · What is a person? — 'Human being' is a species label; 'person' is a status — a being that can think, choose and be held responsible. Warren's checklist (consciousness, reasoning, self-motivated activity, communication, self-awareness) makes personhood about traits, not species.
- 1.4.2 · Self-consciousness — Not just being aware, but being aware that you're aware. Locke: a person 'can consider itself as itself' across time. This may be a matter of degree — some animals show a flicker of it in the mirror test.
- 1.4.3 · Agency — An agent DOES things for reasons, not just has things happen to it. 'She moved to catch the ball' (a reason she holds) vs 'she flinched at a spark' (a cause pushing her). Reasons that are truly yours mark real agency.
- 1.4.4 · Moral responsibility — You can be fairly praised or blamed only for what you really DID as a free, informed agent. Blame lifts under coercion or in a small child. Kant: because we're rational agents, we have DIGNITY — worth beyond price.
- 1.4.5 · Animals and AI as persons — Could a non-human count? Singer: if it can feel, it has moral status. Wiredu/Menkiti: personhood grows by degree through community. AI's deepest test isn't cleverness but whether there's anything it's LIKE to be it.
Never confuse human being with person. 'Human being' is biological — your species, Homo sapiens. 'Person' is a status about mind and morals — a being that can think, choose and be held responsible. Once you separate them, the hard cases open up: could a non-human be a person? Could a human fail to be one?
✍️ Bring it together — a Section A question
Stimulus — A carer speaks about the assistance robot on her ward: "The patients say please and thank you to it. They apologise when they bump it. Part of me wants to say it's just a machine — but the way they treat it, you'd think it was one of us." With explicit reference to the stimulus and your own knowledge, explore a philosophical issue related to what it is to be human.
Model answer plan
See the mark-by-mark plan — for / against / judgement, with marking guidance — in study mode.
Important: Describing views instead of arguing them. Don't just say 'Warren thinks X, Kant thinks Y.' Give each view a reason, test it with an objection, then decide. A name earns nothing without its argument — and a top answer always reaches a reasoned conclusion, never 'it's just opinion'.
✅ Check yourself
If you can answer these six, you have the spine of the whole topic.
Human being vs person? 'Human being' is a species (Homo sapiens); 'person' is a status — a being that can think, choose and be held responsible.
Warren's marks of personhood? Consciousness, reasoning, self-motivated activity, communication, and self-awareness — traits, not a particular species.
What is self-consciousness (Locke)? Being aware that you're aware — a person 'can consider itself as itself', the same thinking thing, at different times and places.
Reason vs cause in agency? A cause pushes you (flinching at a spark); a reason is one you hold and act on (moving to catch a ball). Real agency runs on your own reasons.
Kant on dignity? Because we're rational agents who can reason about right and wrong, we have dignity — a priceless worth that can't be traded away.
The deepest test for AI personhood? Not cleverness but whether there's anything it's LIKE to be the machine — an inner feel, not just the right outputs.
Exam tips
- Section A is a 25-mark essay on the core theme — personhood is a strong issue, and this whole topic feeds it.
- Turn the stimulus into a question about what makes something a person, then explore → evaluate → conclude.
- Name a thinker ONLY with their argument — a name on its own earns no marks.
- Always weigh at least two views and end on a reasoned conclusion, not a list.