I wanted to expand upon our discussion of what constitutes a “person” in the context of my independent work, from previous literature in the class, and in reference to my group project for this class on the pandemic. 

I first stumbled across this notion of defining what a person is and is not in my independent work; I’ve observed a sharp division in the neighborhood and area that I’m collaborating with in Philadelphia between those who are residents and others that occupy the same geographic space but are not considered residents. When pointing out the non-residents or “others,” oftentimes comments are made about their behavior and decisions, which drives me to question if personhood could be at least partially based on what is culturally normalized about how a person acts and behaves in public. I also wonder if the ability to collect data on an individual defines personhood, as we briefly discussed in class. Many of these others/non-residents/drug-addicts do not have a permanent address or a credit card number. Does lacking this data mean they are less of a person? Another example of personhood manifesting in data collection is data I found on naloxone administration, in which the data’s label was “naloxone administered;” this passive language leaves out the context of the human-to-human relationship and interaction that occurred. If the government expanded this label, would they  include naloxone administered to a person/human/drug addict? I’m wondering if they would label it as “the unconscious” which is another layer of personhood; is a person defined by their consciousness? As you can probably tell, I have more questions than answers for this topic. 

I think there is a connection here to the Rodney King video, where the defense added their own context to depict him as animalistic, and therefore less of a person. To me, this case reinforces the cultural norm that society believes that an individual on drugs, or possibly could be on drugs, occupies a state that doesn’t categorize them as human or a person. Is the data collected on drug users, labeled with this passive language, reinforcing these cultural norms of personhood? I’m really interested in the societal structures that set these standards of determining personhood; I think they are complex and entangled but are reinforced by current cultural norms. 

Switching contexts, I think the language and the graphs/charts used in the media and local news channels describing the COVID19 pandemic could be an interesting site of further discussion for us all: I feel like I hear the words “cases” and “deaths” without the direct link to the human/person. When we use terms such as cases and deaths rather than “human deaths”, are we implying that there is a shift in personhood or agency from a person who is COVID-free to an individual as a “case”? I’m wondering why we are taking this impersonal view on the pandemic; is it easier to convey this “big data” in media when it doesn’t have an emotional, or human centered connection? I’m curious what my project group and the rest of the class thinks about this.