Final answer:
The onset of personhood is not universally agreed upon cross-culturally and can vary based on cultural, religious, and philosophical standpoints. The belief among some that it begins at or before birth is not a global consensus. Modern philosophical debates often weigh concepts of personhood against rights and criteria for moral status.
Step-by-step explanation:
The concept of personhood and its onset is a deeply complex and cross-culturally diverse issue. It is false that cross-culturally it is understood that personhood begins at or before birth universally. Cultures and philosophical beliefs differ widely on this topic. For instance, the Israeli cultural model sees personhood beginning with a child's first breath, while Aristotelian philosophy, which has influenced Christian thought, initially equated the ensoulment and hence the personhood with a stage after conception. The modern debate often revolves around rights, with some philosophers arguing that an entity's status as a human being is enough for personhood, while others argue personhood begins when rational capacity is sufficiently developed.
In dealing with the morality of abortion, some contemporary philosophers have sidelined the notion of a God-given soul in favor of modern views of personhood. Mary Anne Warren, for instance, proposed five criteria essential to personhood, shedding light on the complexity of defining when personhood begins. Ronald Dworkin adds to this by suggesting that merely being human grants an individual full moral status. Furthermore, historical precedent within Christian theology has shifted over time, with earlier notions of ensoulment occurring at different stages after conception, later altered by Pope Pius IX to the belief that the soul is present at conception.