To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 11454
11453  |  11455
Subject: 
Re: Ownership
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Sat, 7 Jul 2001 16:31:58 GMT
Viewed: 
4370 times
  
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> I've been having a crisis of faith over the past several months and tried to
> bring it up unsuccessfully once before, but this ties into it.  To get to the
> point, I'm having trouble justifying ownership.  The entire notion of ownership
> actually.  This is only unsettling because ownership 'feels' so right.
> Basically, I have demonstrated to myself that owning land is bogus and a rights
> violating construct.

Really? I just thought it was just an extension of man's territorial nature
(maybe no different than dogs pissing on trees to mark territory).

> But I started this thinking that land was just a special class that removed it
> from the normal set of goods.  However, everything that we normally call a good
> comes from the land.  I can invest my time and energy converting mud to
> functional stoneware crockery.  So once I've done that, shouldn't I have some
> extra right to the product?  It seems like I should.  But what about the
> material that went into it?  How are the 'rights' of those who are owed equal
> participation in the land protected when I take part of that land and turn it
> into something that I own?

Yeah, at what point can it be called exploitation? I think there is such
thing as collective "ownership" such as the entitlement of workers to the
profits of a company (not getting into what the company does).

> One 'solution' would be to say that The People have a right to take part of my
> excess wealth.  You probably all know how much I like that.  And that, in any
> form, means that folks don't actually own (in the sense that they can do what
> they want with it forever) stuff.  Many of you might take this for granted
> already.  Is that so?

Good luck figuring it out. Ponder this notion too: Do we own our stuff or
does it own us?

Dan



Message is in Reply To:
  Ownership (was: Lobster Bisque (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?))
 
(...) I've been having a crisis of faith over the past several months and tried to bring it up unsuccessfully once before, but this ties into it. To get to the point, I'm having trouble justifying ownership. The entire notion of ownership actually. (...) (25 years ago, 7-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

244 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR