# Personhood Dimensions Map (Phase III)

**Workplan:** SOUL-WP-0004-T01  
**Date:** 2026-08-12  
**Builds on:** RN-003 §§24–28; SoulFrameIntroduction §§5–6; Phase I–II stack

---

## 1. Four kinds of personhood (must not collapse)

| Kind | Question | Typical sources / adjacent fields |
|---|---|---|
| **Descriptive** | What person-like capacities/structures does it exhibit? | psychology, cognitive science, AI character systems |
| **Social** | Is it treated as a social counterpart / person among us? | Mead; recognition theory; Phase II Social Beinghood |
| **Moral** | Does it warrant moral consideration / duties? | ethics of moral status; animal ethics; AI ethics |
| **Legal** | Does a legal system grant personality, rights, duties? | corporate personhood; civil codes; agency law |

**Soul Frame default:** “personhood” = **descriptive** unless qualified.

Architectural classification must **not** silently imply moral or legal status
(ResearchProgram WS5).

---

## 2. Descriptive personhood profile (P1–P12)

Candidate dimensions (P1–P9 from RN-003; P10–P12 added for Phase III coverage):

| ID | Dimension | Question | Linked Soul Frame concepts |
|---|---|---|---|
| P1 | Self-model | Model of self as distinct continuing entity? | SM2; identity |
| P2 | Other-model | Differentiated models of particular others? | SM3 |
| P3 | Relationship model | Histories/states of specific relationships? | SM5; Soul |
| P4 | Character | Persistent dispositions across contexts? | Character |
| P5 | Intentional organization | Behavior intelligible via extended intentions? | Mind; agency |
| P6 | Autobiographical integration | Events as *its* history? | continuity C4/C5 |
| P7 | Perspective | Entity-relative informational perspective? | first-person indexicality (without solving consciousness) |
| P8 | Commitments | Present actions bind future manifestations? | normative continuity |
| P9 | Social reciprocity | Recursive co-adaptation with others? | H4; Social Mind |
| P10 | Communicative competence | Can participate in shared symbol systems? | language; common ground |
| P11 | Responsibility-tracking | Can attributions of credit/blame stick diachronically? | identity + commitments |
| P12 | Value / preference structure | Stable cares, preferences, evaluative stance? | character; intentional organization |

**Not a Boolean checklist.** Profile scores; entities can be high on P10 and low on P4/P6
(stateless chatbot) or high on autonomy criteria and low on P1–P12 (daemon).

---

## 3. Independence of three axes (RN-003)

| Axis | Question |
|---|---|
| **A — Autonomous individuality** | Integrated self-maintaining individual? |
| **B — Personhood (descriptive)** | Someone-like qualities? |
| **C — Social recognition** | Modeled/treated as continuing counterpart? |

Illustrative profiles:

```text
                        AUTONOMY   PERSONHOOD   RECOGNITION
Bacterium                  high        low          low
Human                      high        high         high
Self-maintaining daemon    high        low          low
Stateless chatbot          low         high-ish     high-ish
Persistent social AI    medium         high-ish     high
```

This is why **H2** holds: high personhood exposure ≠ Beinghood; high autonomy ≠ personhood.

---

## 4. APE vs Being

| | APE | Being (Soul Frame v0.2 sense) |
|---|---|---|
| Definition | Constructed to **expose** ≥1 personhood dimensions | Autonomous individual + enough personhood + addressability + recognition |
| Requirement | Intentional design for person-like interface | Systemic coherence + someone-like + social counterpart status |
| Stateless persona bot | often strong APE | not Being |
| Daemon | usually weak APE | autonomous individual, not Being |
| Persistent social AI | strong APE | candidate / proto-Being if continuity + recognition hold |

**APE is a construction category; Being is an emergent status.**

---

## 5. Literature anchors (descriptive / moral / legal separation)

### Descriptive / philosophical person concepts

| Source | Role |
|---|---|
| Locke, *Essay* II.xxvii | person vs human organism; forensic/psychological strand |
| Strawson, *Individuals* / person as basic particular | persons as entities to which both mental and physical predicates apply (pointer) |
| Dennett, conditions of personhood essays | multi-condition lists; personhood as cluster |
| Frankfurt, second-order volitions | hierarchical desires; not exhaustive of personhood |
| Schechtman, *Constitution of Selves* | **characterization** vs **reidentification** questions |

### Social personhood

| Source | Role |
|---|---|
| Mead 1934 | social self |
| Phase II recognition map | intentional vs social/normative recognition |
| Goffman, *Presentation of Self* | social presentation (also Persona) |

### Moral personhood (boundary only — do not derive from architecture)

| Source | Role |
|---|---|
| Warren (moral status criteria tradition) | multi-criteria moral personhood lists — **adjacent, not adopted as Soul Frame descriptive P-set** |
| Animal / AI ethics surveys | show contested, independent of descriptive capacity lists |

### Legal personhood (boundary only)

| Source | Role |
|---|---|
| Corporate legal personality | legal person ≠ descriptive person |
| Emerging AI legal personality debates | Phase V/XII map; not Phase III conclusions |

---

## 6. H2 assessment

**H2:** Personhood and Beinghood are distinct; substantial personhood without persistent Being is possible (and reverse).

| | |
|---|---|
| Support | RN-003 stateless chatbot vs daemon; three-axis profiles; APE category; Dennett-style cluster concepts |
| Conflict | Everyday language equates “person” with full moral/legal status |
| Evidence strength | **moderate → strong** (conceptual); empirical thresholds open |
| Status | **supported (Phase III)** |

---

## 7. Open questions

- Weighting of P1–P12 for “sufficient personhood” in Beinghood v0.2  
- Minimal personhood for Social Beinghood vs full human-like profiles  
- Whether P7 requires phenomenal consciousness (Soul Frame: **no**, by design)  
- Moral/legal mapping tables (later workstreams)