Ha! Easy to say and hard to do, not least because the definition or even the very notion of "person" is by no means clear, universal or otherwise a clear entity to serve as some sort of benchmark against our thoughts and doings.
But suppose we can latch on to some coherent notion of "person" ...... what is it likely to be? In this day and age, especially in our highly-mediated cultural creek, a person is most likely to be defined as essentially a consumer-come-exploitable resource, as far as the major architects of our lifestyles are concerned at least.
Many these days also apply some sort of potted-identity label to themselves, obtainable from that same mass media that applies the consumer-human resource harness to us all. But how real are these potted identities? When closely examined, analysed or subject to a forensic investigation, they often turn out to be chimerical illusions and delusions.
A mental experiment. Considering the various and numerous possibilities of diverging life-paths we might have taken (rather than those we did take) who would we be "personally" instead of the person we now feel we have become? And as a side-experiment, how many of those divergent paths did we ourselves decide to take in any truly considerative way and how many saw us propelled down the path we took by the various cultural forces at that moment directing or canalising us?
Personally (ha ha) I suspect that I could have been one of a vast range of potential personalities today if I'd gone one way rather than another at several thousand divergent possible routes on my lifetime's highway. Whatever "person" I may be now (probably a hodge-podge of all sorts of cultural fragments) it could have been so different if only I'd slid this way or that at various junctures.
All of them would still probably be within the "consumer/exploitable resource" category. We are mostly made, not makers.
