Subject:
|
Re: The nature of property (was: Idiots, Part Deux)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 14 Feb 2003 06:10:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
831 times
|
| |
|
|
Christopher Weeks wrote:
>
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes:
>
> > Unfortunately this debate which I feel is actually worthwhile to me is
> > getting burried by some other debate.
>
> Buried in that other people aren't contributing their thoughts because they're
> too wrapped up in the more emotionally satisfying debates about unsolvable
> situations in the Middle East? Or buried in that _you_ are too busy in the
> other thread? (I'm not reading the stuff on terrorism or Iraq.)
Both. I have tried several times to bail out of .debate, but I've never
really stopped reading. I do tend to skim some peoples posts, and I
think I'm finally getting the self control to not respond to pointless
debates, but I still read them.
> > It seems like everytime you raise
> > the "should land be property" issue,
>
> This makes me start to sound like a broken record. I guess that's because I
> haven't found anyone who writes on the idea (if anyone can point me, that'd be
> keen!) and haven't found people with whom to talk it through.
No more of a broken record than anyone else here... I'm certainly not
saying it's bad. To me, it's an interesting debate, and one where I feel
my opinions have room to change.
Finding people to talk to is definitely a problem for me. A good .debate
or a good game rules discussion exercises my brain in a way I don't use
at work. I keep thinking I should try and find more like minded people
at church. Sadly, I think too many UUs don't really explore things.
> > which would be new ground for
> > debate, some other debate starts up and burries this one under the
> > tiring Middle East or religion debates. This is what continually
> > frustrates me about .debate and makes me want to just wash my hands of
> > the whole thing.
>
> We could talk it through anyway, just ignoring the repetitious flak. We might
> have fairly few participants, but we'd get some. We might have to be careful
> to not pursue our own spin-off debate topics too. I think the abortion issue
> is certainly tied to the right to exist, but not central to the point. It
> would be easy for us to spend serious time trying to figure out the impact on
> the morality of abortion and get distracted. One that I'm more likely to get
> twisted up on is the existence of _any_ goods since they all come from the land.
I'd certainly like to try and keep this discussion going. I agree that
the abortion issue is tied (though I think it may even be central), but
is best left out since it is way too charged for right now. I think a
good thoughtfull exploration of fundamental rights would end up guiding
us to the right answer on abortion.
I agree with your feeling that it's hard/impossible to separate portable
goods from land since they do come from land (or an extension of land in
the case of a meteorite falling). It may be better to abstract things a
step and talk about resources, of which land and energy are the two most
crucial (and of course they really aren't separate).
> My basic premise is that space in the universe can't be considered a limited
> good in a system that assures that people (intelligences?) have an innate right
> to exist.
>
> This means that we (in the USA) have either misunderstood the role of real
> property by treating it as a good or we have been (accidentally) hypocritical
> by claiming the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" as I
> understand that phrase.
Well, I'm not sure it's assuming as absolute a right to exist as you
are.
Frank
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | The nature of property (was: Idiots, Part Deux)
|
| (...) Buried in that other people aren't contributing their thoughts because they're too wrapped up in the more emotionally satisfying debates about unsolvable situations in the Middle East? Or buried in that _you_ are too busy in the other thread? (...) (21 years ago, 13-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
47 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
