Question 7.

The author highlights multiple elements that constitute the Classic Mayan worldview pertaining to personhood: 

• "Nonhuman persons were not tethered to specific humans, and they did not derive their personhood from a connection with a human."
• "The Maya saw personhood as ‘activated’ by experiencing certain bodily needs and through participation in certain social activities. For example, among the faced objects that I examined, persons are marked by personal requirements (such as hunger, tiredness, physical closeness), and by community obligations (communication, interaction, ritual observance)"
• "Personhood was a nonbinary proposition for the Maya. Entities were able to be persons while also being something else...With these Maya examples, we are challenged to discard the person/nonperson binary that constitutes our basic ontological outlook"

Inspecting the options using the above ideas as filters, we notice that Option B is closest to the Classic Mayan worldview. A tribe that "perceives plants as person-plants because they form an ecosystem and are marked by needs of nutrition" acknowledges the two elementary variables for defining personhood - personal requirements and community obligations. 

Options A and C tether the personhood of the objects to their utility to humans - this does not coincide with the Classic Mayan belief. Although Option D mentions bodily needs, the interpretation of the term 'functionality' remains unclear. Hence, we can eliminate Option D.