Personalization and depersonalization

While depersonalization mat be ascribed to materialism, a reductionist perception of reality, imparting personal (human) characteristics to inanimate entities, even symbols, and other species, is not just the opposite of the former. Of course, both are produced by intellect and cognition. But that is not necessarily so. Birds can tell the difference between an object and an organism with very small brains.

To what extent are the ever-increasing dimensions of the human cranium evidence of increased cognitive capacity and function. The frontal lobes are clearly add-ons and not necessary to survival Cognitive dysfunction is not lethal in a social species. Bees, presumably, have no cognition. Randomness and habit forming repetition seem sufficient. I may be wrong.

Anyway, both attitudes/behaviors seem somehow related to rather pervasive false designations of the categories to which the animate and inanimate are assigned. And I am wondering if that is a result of personhood being effectively excluded from U.S. law and society. The depersonalization of persons as either animate (life) or material makes it possible, logically speaking, to categorize minor humans as property.

Is categorization the prime function of the temporal lobes?