Final answer:
To reconcile personhood's dependence on community with acknowledging personhood in children, philosophers argue that potential for rational development grants moral status, aligning with Aristotle's concept of potentiality. Any human member possesses inherent personhood based on human species membership, independent of rational development level.
Step-by-step explanation:
The reconciliation between the ontological dependence of personhood on community and the recognition of personhood in a young child can be understood by exploring philosophical perspectives on personhood. Philosophers like Kwame Gyekye recognize that the development of a person's rational capabilities is a gradual process, where the potential for such development, inherent in a human from birth, grants a moral status from the outset. This view can align with the concept of potentiality, which is seen in Aristotle's idea of hylomorphism, where an offspring contains the essence of its more mature form—just as an acorn inherently is an oak tree, a human child is recognized as a person despite their undeveloped rationality.
Furthermore, moral status and personhood could also be derived from simply being a member of the human species, according to some views, like those of Ronald Dworkin. Thus, a young child or an individual with undeveloped or compromised rational capabilities would still be granted personhood based on their potential and their innate human dignity, which is independent of their present rational capacities.
These complex arguments are part of broader discourses about the nature of personhood, moral status, and the value of human life that underpin discussions on topics like abortion and the rights of individuals within a community. Different cultures and philosophical traditions offer a variety of perspectives on at what point a human being achieves personhood and is entitled to the rights and protections afforded to them.