Ownership Can Build One's Sense Of Self Identity

Ownership is the act and state of having something in control or possession. Aristotle claims that owning tangible objects help to build moral character, while Jean-Paul Sartre proposes that ownership extends beyond to include intangible things such as skill or knowledge. Different objects can have varying effects on the development of self identity, leading us to who we grow as a person. A sense of self can be a reflection to what we own, whether it is a tangible or not. Ownership of intangible and tangible objects play a vital role for the growth of self identity, as it teaches crucial morals in life to develop personal character.

In this paper, I will argue that the Memory Theory of Personal Identity is the closest to the truth. I will do so by showing that the opposing theories – Body and Soul Theories – have evident flaws and that the

Anywhere in the world, someone acquires something, whether it be money, a car, or even an idea. We can “own” many intangible and tangible items in life, but how does ownership relate to a sense and development of self? This question has been constantly answered for centuries through intelligent people like Plato, Aristotle, and Jean-Paul Sartre. However, the question has received no agreeable answer. In the end, people will agree that there is a strong and positive relationship between ownership and a sense of self because the things you own will define and develop who you are positively by exhibiting what you like, what you can and cannot do, and in the end, characterizes you, as long as you use the things you own properly.

The relationship between our identities and possessions remains on going. In fact, Joan Kron elaborates on that matter in her essay The Semiotics of Home Décor and mentions how we barely know what is actually beyond our home décor and possessions (74). Kron argues that our possessions and home décor grants us with various aims that cater to our human needs “Our possessions give us a sense of security and stability. They make us feel in control…we use things to compete.” (75). Also, Kron talks about status and how its vitality is depicted through our possessions. Something as simple as the price tag, the originality and rareness of the object and its competence can say something about our status. With this in mind, Kron asserts that “Some objects

The ability to have ownership over something, tangible or not, can give a person a sense of value or superiority when comparing themselves to others. Furthermore, as humans, it is easy to desire things as one’s own and claim it, but the way something is treated differs from person to person. As a result, the material items and skills a person has ownership over provides a glimpse of his or her’s true nature.

Twentieth-century philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre proposes that ownership extends beyond tangible objects; In Jean-Paul's view, becoming proficient in some skill and knowing something means that we "own" it. According to Sartre, I "own" the sport soccer because I chose to develop my skills as a soccer player, and now I play competitive travel soccer because I am skilled enough to compete with the other girls. I don't physically own this sport the way most people legally define ownership. I own soccer because I made it a part of me, it

Anywhere in the world, someone acquires something, whether it be money, a car, or even an idea. We can “own” many intangible and tangible items in life, but how does ownership relate to a sense of self? This question has been constantly answered for centuries through intelligent people like Plato, Aristotle, and Jean-Paul Sartre. However, the question has received no agreeable answer. In the end, people will agree that there is a strong and positive relationship between ownership and a sense of self because the things you own will define and develop who you are positively by exhibiting what you like, what you can and cannot do, and in the end, characterizes you, as long as you use the items you own properly.

Ownership exists between the tangible and the intangible; while owning objects often devolve into unhappiness and heighten a dangerous materialistic outlook, ownership of the intangible promotes and builds a concrete, upright moral character. The pursuit of tangible ownership inevitably leads to a precarious path of dissatisfaction and misery. While the attainment of material goods may have benefits, it quickly devolves into a twisted desire that spurs the growth of emotions such as greed; this appears mainly when the ownership of tangible items defines a person’s status and gives people a sense of worthiness. At this point, people define themselves with their possessions of the number of flashy cars and extravagant mansions they own rather than relying on their own personality.

Defining the idea of “ownership” is the act, state, or right of possessing something. Drawing from different philosophers who have studied the human condition, they look at the principle of ownership in relation to one's sense of self. Aristotle claims that tangible ownership is fundamental to developing a person’s character. However, in Jean-Paul Sartre’s view, he claims that the “existence precedes the essence”. Sartre is saying how there is an equal balance between tangible and intangible items, but the existence is more important than nature since man can choose what they define himself to be.

Everyone has a different view of what ownership is, and what it does to a person. For many, owning something is thought of as possessing a physical object that can be called yours, though it can be much more. Plato says that the idea and act of owning anything is harmful to someone as a person. Aristotle has a brighter outlook, saying that the act of owning something is beneficial to a person. While Sartre claims that the idea of ownership goes beyond simply having an object, and can apply to things that don't actually exist. While all of these views are valid, with each being able to hold it's own ground, it is up to the listener of the three to figure out and justify which applies best to them.

Personal identity is essential in the human experience. Identity is complex and can be broken down into two main groups: introspective identity, and bodily identity. Introspective identity is based off of the groups, mentalities, or beliefs that you align yourself with, and bodily identity is based off of the physical side of yourself. Whether physical or introspective, your identity impacts every action you take. Whether choices ranging from what colors you prefer to which college you want to attend are primarily based off of your introspective identity, which is a combination of both memory and consciousness, physical identity impacts how others perceive you. Consciousness is mainly the awareness of bodily identity as well as continuous introspective identify, while memory is awareness of introspective identity. These two different facets of identity are imperative in the distinction between bodily identity and introspective identity. In means of personal identity introspective identity (which is evident in memory), is essential, while bodily identity (based partially in consciousness) has less credit.

When it comes to the topic of ownership, most of us will readily agree that everyone obtains a certain item or in general, something. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of does ownership jeopardize an individual's ego or personality. Whereas some are convinced that they can cause pretentious people, others maintain that they are a personality developers. Although some believe that materialistic items and success make a person, it’s not a necessity to fully live a satisfying life.

Ownership extends a lot farther than tangible objects. Like twentieth century philosopher, Jean-Paul Sartre proposed, ownership can also mean having skills and knowledge. Any independent person can create their own ideas. Extending beyond physical objects, a sense of self is developed through ownership. One can

When you have a sense of “owning” an intangible skill it can be important towards a strong development with creating a sense of your self identity. For me, learning and trying to master a skill, like photography, was such a great thing for me because it’s not like an object that I can lose and it is now a new skill that I think I own and feel confident in. Learning this skill was beneficial to my development on learning and creating my identity because it made me realize who I really am. What I have learned made me have a sense of “ownership” over this skill and it helped me develop and discover my sense of self.

Many people question themselves, what is it exactly that makes them unique? What is it that defines them as a unique person that no one in the world possesses? In philosophy, these questions do not have just one answer, and all answers are correct depending on which theory appeals most and makes sense to you. In general, there are two ways people approach this question, some say that a person’s identity is the “self” that carries all of their experiences, thoughts, memories, and consciousness (ego theorists), and some say that a person’s identity is just a bundle of experiences and events that a person has been through in their life, these people deny that the “self” exists (bundle theorists). In this paper, I will be arguing that a person’s identity is just a bundle of experiences, denying the self and the memory criterion.