Show Posts
1
The Philosophy of Freedom/Libertarianism/Doctrine of free will / Philosophical reasoning of ownership?? Ontology and Cosmology
« on: June 22, 2016, 12:46:27 PM »
From what little I've read about libertarianism, the NAP, and even this website, one of the foundational beliefs is that of ownership, primarily that a human owns him/herself. What is this ideology based upon? As life forms on this planet, we are all interconnected with the planet, its resources, and all the life forms therein. People are byproducts of other people. (They didn't create themselves.) Their parents were likewise byproducts of theirs, and so on. This is leads us into the cosmological argument (causation). Ultimately the argument leads to the beginning of the planet, the solar system, the Galaxy, the universe, and all matter. At this point we arrive with two options: matter was created by an entity of non-matter (deity), or the belief of ex nihilo (out of nothing). So ownership would ultimately lie with whichever option you choose, either God owns everything, or nothing does (ownership doesn't exist.)
To sustain life, people consume other biomaterial (life) and utilize the natural resources around them. But does simply using/ utilizing something confer ownership of the thing? If so, what constitutes use? Is building a house both a use of the materials for the house and the land on which it dwells? If so, then once it is built, must someone actively be dwelling in it for it to be theirs? So if someone else moves in while you are at the store, tough luck... So obviously the idea of use applies to everything outside the person. But does it apply to the person too? If the person does nothing (brain dead and on life support) do they have ownership, or are they owned by the people running the machines? Everyone else's use of person is also a use of the planet at large, as we are all interconnected and interdependent for sustainment of life. So the planet uses all the things on/ in the planet... Tying ownership to utilization appears to fail too, or at least lead to the cosmological argument once again.
Ok, whatcha think friends?
To sustain life, people consume other biomaterial (life) and utilize the natural resources around them. But does simply using/ utilizing something confer ownership of the thing? If so, what constitutes use? Is building a house both a use of the materials for the house and the land on which it dwells? If so, then once it is built, must someone actively be dwelling in it for it to be theirs? So if someone else moves in while you are at the store, tough luck... So obviously the idea of use applies to everything outside the person. But does it apply to the person too? If the person does nothing (brain dead and on life support) do they have ownership, or are they owned by the people running the machines? Everyone else's use of person is also a use of the planet at large, as we are all interconnected and interdependent for sustainment of life. So the planet uses all the things on/ in the planet... Tying ownership to utilization appears to fail too, or at least lead to the cosmological argument once again.
Ok, whatcha think friends?