Ownership's Role In Relationships

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.

People who have less than others are usually outsiders. People who have more misjudge people who have less. For example somebody might have name brand clothing while the other person has more of a generic or an off brand item. Instead of looking at one another for how they treat each other they look at how much or how little you have. Another big part of this is money. When you look at high schools, especially you see that most groups of friends if not all, have parents that make the same amount of money and are in the same social class. Most people that try to fit into a different group succeed only to find out that they are outsiders in that group. Weather they try hard to fit in or think they do fit in a group they are always left out in some way. “You’ve jumped through every hoop and worn all the right masks, but it seems that all your efforts still aren’t good enough.

Unfortunately, if we are constantly comparing ourselves to celebrities and other people we will never learn to appreciate what we have. Delia Ephron, a writer for the New York Times, writes her stance on having it all in an article entitled “You Can’t Have It All, but You Can Have Cake”. In the article she describes how social media and society as a whole have provided this unattainable image of what it means to have it all. You have to have a nice car, fancy house, perfect children, high-status job… the list goes on and on. This “depressingly American” notion assumes that having it all is the same for everyone, that this version of life is desired by all; however,

Ownership helps define a person. It shows how a person uses what they own that defines and develops a persons’ self. Ownership is paramount to the development of self. Money may be the root of all evil, but the ownership of money can help develop leaders to further help and support other

Do possessions have an affect on the people who own them? In reference to King Solomon, “when [he] reflected on all the works that [his] own hands had done and on all the hard work that [he] had toiled to accomplish, [he] saw that everything was futile”. King Solomon believed that he could never fully be satisfied by his possessions. Because he worked so long and hard to acquire his meaningless possessions, he was tied down by his property. King Solomon also claimed that he acquired “more [possessions] than any of [his] predecessors” and “surpassed anyone prior to him in Jerusalem”. Society and other people were his driving force to get more possessions. Solomon says that property does affect people and that these effects include dissatisfaction,

This leads some people to believe that we can never really own anything because it already belongs to God. While this is true in a sense I agree with the author when he says that God created us with a desire to own things so that we could imitate his sovereignty that way. Another article I read concerning property ownership says, “Those who wish to deny private property, and thus, the biblical mandate of stewardship, fail to recognize God’s order for society” (Demar, 2010). When God made us He gave charge over the Earth and everything in it and having been given charge of it we assume ownership of it until we leave it. The example that I have heard a lot for this is the parable of the unfaithful steward. In this parable, a nobleman left the country to receive a kingdom for himself, leaving ten of his servants each with a mina to look after while he was gone. While the other servants did something to increase the possessions they were given one hid it so it would be safe. When the nobleman returns and discovers this he takes the mina from the poor steward and gives it to another. This infers ownership of the mina that each servant was given because he takes what the one steward has and gives it to another. He doesn’t keep it because the charge of it has been given over to the servants. Insights like these in the Bible help to prove the fact of personal ownership.

On top of caring too much about other people’s opinions. We care too much about what our material possessions say about us. We care too much about what kind of clothes to wear, what kind of house we own, what kind of car we drive- things that aren’t meant to define us. Yes, it’s nice to have material things especially when they act as a reward for your achievements, but somehow that sense of reward has simply transferred to “Yeah well, look what else I have that you don’t”.

In society today, people are judged based on what physical objects they own and what skills they possess. People possess different skills, such as being prominent in music, art, etc. People also own different physical objects, some own more than others. Plato states that owning objects is detrimental to one's character, where Aristotle states it builds moral character. Finally, Sartre says that ownership extends past the tangible objects. I agree with all of these philosophers in a sense. I believe that people can own objects, as well as skills or knowledge, and those objects that one possesses can change a character for better or worse, depending on how they show what they own.

Ownership in conjunction with stewardship is a reflection of the character of Jehovah. Comparatively, so is productivity. According to Grudem, he states that," producing goods and services is fundamentally good and provides many opportunities for glorying God" (p. 26). Initially, the Lord gave Adam rule over the earth, and instructed him to increase the resources that were available to him. Furthermore, prior to the famine that spread throughout Egypt and Canaan, Joseph, given authority by Pharaoh, stored up food during the years of abundance, so the nations would have the means during perilous times (Genesis 41:30, KJV). Imagine, what would have happened during the time of scarcity, if the people wasted their possessions during of time

Ownership is the act of making something your own, to make it belong to you and only you. The idea of ownership extends to include both tangible and intangible items, combining both Aristotle’s and Sartre’s views on the subject. While we own our cars, houses, and new iPhones, we also own our experiences, knowledge, and skills. The only barrier that separates the two is the sense of touch, in that the tangible possessions reside in our minds, while the tangible in our hands.

To have ownership of an object (tangible of nature) does not determine one's self worth. One who owns nothing of materialistic nature, has the purest sense of themselves. They will not have known temptation, or having actions restricted by a lack (or surplus) of any object. Plato's view on ownership are very similar in his ideas introduced in the Socratic discussion The Republic. The belief that human beings are driven by an excess of bodily desire to accumulate stuff well beyond our needs. And that materialistic goods taint the minds of society and and debilitate it from creating rational thought as a whole. Instead of having a society that works in best interest of the entire population, we have a population divided by the things they own

Each of these philosophers’ thoughts is correct, but not entirely on their own. Ownership is the possession of both tangible and intangible items and can be helpful and harmful to a person’s character. The saying goes, “everything in moderation.” Parents tell their children this constantly when asked for toys, treats, and the like, and this statement is true in the area of ownership.

Society plays a big part of the corruption of kids thinking nonname brands is a no- no. As a 13-year-old boy, my experience of social class basically shaped the way I viewed fashion. Going to a school and living in a town that's mostly middle class it mainly made me view fashion as a way to fit in with everyone else and also a competition to see who can rock it better. Now maturing from that experience I still see fashion as a way people try to fit in but I don't try to fit in anymore I wear what I want name brand or not because I don't care what anyone has to say any more about the way I dress or about me. I have the confidence now to be who I am and not let anyone change that for me. Even billionaire Mark Zuckerberg has the confidence to wear a hoodie to a major facebook show in “ Why is Everyone Focused On Zuckerberg's Hoodie?” Somini Sengupta said, “ His defenders said the hoodie signified Silicon Valley ethos: a brash, youthful self- confidence” (229). If a billionaire has the confidence not to care what people think about his clothes be shouldn't

Throughout all my years of school I’ve seen this occur. Ever since elementary school people will always hop on the latest trend and will consistently bash others if they’re not. In elementary school there was one kid who got bullied and made fun of everyday, but one day he came in with the latest Jordan’s and suddenly everyone was talking to him and wanting to be his friend. In middle school I was always made fun of because I had shoes from Payless and even my “friends” used to laugh at me and call me a “bum-ass.” In 8th grade when I got some jordans everyone was suddenly so nice to me. I started wondering why people change their attitudes towards others based on materialistic things.

The Personhood theory considers property to be an extension of one’s personality. Through spending a lot of time with certain property, people grow sentimentally attached to it. It then becomes an integral part of their lives as well as a defining part of who they are as a person. Good real world examples of this are wedding rings. These meaningful posessions have a lot of sentimental value attached to them, to the point where they stop being merely an object but also become part of one’s sense of identity.