[mypastself]

Until we gain a proper understanding and definition of consciousness, the matter is almost purely linguistic. Redefining the term “person” could happen if there’s a critical mass for it, but I think it’s unlikely because it would almost certainly serve to confuse, rather than inform, at least in everyday communication.

I haven’t looked deeply into the linked paper yet (although it does look interesting), but I’ve given the philosophical matter some amount of thought before.

I can only be (fairly) certain of the existence of my own consciousness. There’s no reason to think I’m special in regards to other people, so it’s safe to assume they have it as well. Animals seem to exhibit similar behaviors, and since we have a shared evolutionary background, I’d include many animal species, too.

Can’t say much for anything beyond that, regardless of how convincing, say, an AI’s words might sound. A photorealistic painting might also fool me, but I still wouldn’t attribute personhood to it afterwards.

The Star Trek: The Next Generation episode “The Measure of a Man” did slightly change my mind on this matter, though. If we ever construct an artificial intelligence sufficiently similar to a human, it might be wise to err on the side of caution with respect to ethical treatment.