Personhood?

    The definition of 'human' is having the qualities, faults, and feelings that people have, as opposed to gods, animals, and machines. This complicates the idea that 'human' is a species, where it is more defined as a title that could be given on the behalf that something is 'human' enough. This leads to what and who can be defined as a 'person.' A person is a being that has certain capacities or attributes such as reason, morality, consciousness or self-consciousness. This again complicates the idea that a 'human' or 'person' is simply a matter of being a species that is held in higher regard because of the consciousness or intelligence held. 

    Both of these definitions lead to the idea that one could be 'human' or a 'person' without being biologically human. This has led to an animal being given the title of personhood. An orangutan named Sandra was granted 'personhood' in 2014 by a judge in Argentina. She was termed by the court as a 'subject of rights' and later a 'non-human person.' This allows freeway where the term 'person' is loose and only requires certain capacities.

    When an animal can gain personhood, why can't artificial intelligence gain the same right? In the near future, where artificial intelligence can develop emotions and have advanced cognitive processes, would we be able to consider artificial intelligence 'people?'