Why Is Ownership An Illusion? Essay

---WE ACHIEVE EXCELLENCE IN THE INTELLECTUAL LIFE, ACCORDING TO THIS TRADITION, WHEN WE FORM WITHIN OURSELVES QUALITIES LIKE WISDOM, PRUDENCE, UNDERSTANDING, INTELLECTUAL HUMILITY, LOVEOF TRUTH AND SIMILAR TRAITS---SOME BELIEFS ARE TREMENDOUSLY IMPORTANT IN SHAPING OUR LIVES AND GUIDING OUR BEHAVIOR/CHARACTER IS AT STAKE

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.

Every man has a property in his own person: this no body has any right to but himself. The Labor of his body, and the body, and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his (qtd. in SoloHQ).

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.

“Though the earth, and all inferior creatures be common to all men, yet every man has a property in his own person. This nobody has any right to but himself. The labour of his body, and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his. Whatsoever then he removes out of the state that Nature hath provided, and left it in, he hath mixed his labour with, and joined to it something that is his own, and thereby makes it his property”. “From all which it is evident, that though the things of Nature are given in common, man (by being master of himself, and proprietor of his own person, and the actions or labour of it) has still in himself the great foundation of property;...” (Locke, 1978

Cultural Marxist George Lipsitz in The Possessive Investment in Whiteness: How White People Profit from Identity Politics consolidates both the structural theory of institutional racism and the political cultural ideology and conception of racism history in the context of political changes in the Untied States. Lipsitz is not the first historian to analyze critical racism theory, but he is the first to extend the analysis into the late twentieth century.

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

When the topic of owning something comes up, the conversation can go two ways: one may argue that ownership is owning an object, many other people, such as Jean-Paul Sartre believe that you can own something by becoming an expert in a certain skill and knowing something thoroughly.It's possible to own an idea or a skill, such as my idea about ownership, and to own a tangible object, such as a book. The verb " to own" doesn't just mean to physically have something, it also means to know something, or to make something a part of ourselves.

In the Second Treatise of Government by John Locke, he writes about the right to private property. In the chapter which is titled “Of Property” he tells how the right to private property originated, the role it plays in the state of nature, the limitations that are set on the rights of private property, the role the invention of money played in property rights and the role property rights play after the establishment of government.. In this chapter Locke makes significant points about private property. In this paper I will summarize his analysis of the right to private property, and I will give my opinion on some of the points Locke makes in his book. According to Locke, the right to private property originated when God gave the world to

What does it mean to own something? An individual may own something that has more significance to the item than meets the eye. This subject has encouraged prominent thinkers to learn more about the idea. This has entered a very fascinating way of thinking that has even perplexed the astounding minds of Plato, Aristotle, and Jean-Paul Sartre. This is why owning something has more significance than may be thought, tangible goods are detrimental to a person's character, ownership of tangible goods helps to develop moral character, and ownership extends beyond objects to include intangible things as well.

“enhancing self-awareness, recognizing values of ‘congruence, unconditional positive regard, and empathic understanding’, self-responsibility, understanding one’s feelings, awareness of one’s own perspective, being open to experience, being rational, living a fuller life, positive life-direction, acceptance of one’s and other’s uniqueness, prizing one and others, and living a moral and ethical life” (pg. 343).

All the three philosophers, whose work I am going to scrutinize on, have very specific, yet in most cases common views on property. First of all, let me define what the term property means. Property, as I see it, is an object of legal rights that is possessed by an individual or a group of individuals who are directly responsible for this it.

that if X can be without Y then X and Y are distinct. This view that a

“...how any one should ever come to have a property in anything: I will not content myself to answer, that if it be difficult to make out property, upon a supposition that God gave the world to Adam, and his posterity in common, it is impossible that any man, but one universal monarch, should have any property upon a supposition, that God gave the world to Adam, and his heirs in succession, exclusive of all the rest of his posterity.”

Constantly learning and growing in our lifetime, allows us to gain an understanding of the world around us. Analyzing, admiring and reaching for what the world has to offer, we are able to