BoardGameFanatic Posted April 26, 2015 Posted April 26, 2015 We own our bodies, we own our actions and the consequences of them, so do we own something that we steal? After a lengthy discussion with my flatmates and still no conclusion I am putting this forward to the FDR community to hopefully come to a definitive answer. 1
ProfessionalTeabagger Posted April 26, 2015 Posted April 26, 2015 If you stole it then by definition someone else owns it.
BoardGameFanatic Posted April 26, 2015 Author Posted April 26, 2015 If I pick an apple off a tree that is not owned by anyone I own that apple by virtue of owning the consequences of my actions. If someone steals that apple from me do they not own it by the virtue of owning the consequences of their actions? Obviously this is immoral but I'm not sure if morality has anything to do with ownership.
Kanith101 Posted April 26, 2015 Posted April 26, 2015 Assuming that ownership has nothing to with morality, If B steals from A and gifts it to C, is A violating the non-aggression principle if he takes it from C? 1
TheRobin Posted April 26, 2015 Posted April 26, 2015 Using the word "own" for actions is rather meaningless, if you use the same definition of "own" that you use for property.Owning property means you got the right to exlude others from using the property. Obviously that doesn't make any sense for actions. What you mean is that we are responsible for our actions. As for ownership and theft, you can go with Hoppe's argument about whoever is first in claiming ownership over a previoulsy unowned property has the strongest claim. Because if you would do it otherwise anyone can come after you and claim ownership, but then by definition no one will own anything, as anyone can jsut claim ownership over anything basically.So if you steal something the other person still has a stronger claim of ownership than you and as a result the right to exclude you from using that thing and since you're responsible for the theft it's up to you to give it back and/or make restitution for it. Same goes for the three-way scenario of Kanith101: A still has the strongest claim, so he can take it back from C. And B owes both A and C restitution, assuming he stole from A and then defrauded C by omiting that it's stolen goods. On the other hand if he C knew it was stolen, then I think he knows he'll have to give it back if the original owner turns up and so B doesn't owe him anything. 3
neeeel Posted April 26, 2015 Posted April 26, 2015 Its a great question. We say "I own my body" but what does that mean , exactly? what is it that owns the body? Does the body own the body? No, that doesnt make sense. Do thoughts of ownership, thoughts about me, own the body? no, they are just thoughts. When we say "I own my body" we are implicitly saying that there is some thing, some entity, external to the body, that owns the body. But what is this thing? Its an important question to consider. Does an object somehow change when it becomes owned, or change when it becomes owned by someone else? Is ownership anything other than a thought saying "I own this", or "He owns this, so I had better not take it"? A shared concept. 1 1
BoardGameFanatic Posted April 26, 2015 Author Posted April 26, 2015 If ownership of property comes from someones action in claiming that property, then if someone makes a claim to someone elses property they now own it. Sure this could continue ad infitium but that doesn't mean that ownership of property doesn't exist it is just constantly changing.
ProfessionalTeabagger Posted April 26, 2015 Posted April 26, 2015 If I pick an apple off a tree that is not owned by anyone I own that apple by virtue of owning the consequences of my actions. If someone steals that apple from me do they not own it by the virtue of owning the consequences of their actions? Obviously this is immoral but I'm not sure if morality has anything to do with ownership. I'm not sure what you're talking about. What do you think "owning the consequences of your actions" means? Are you asking what is ownership or are you asking do we own something we steal? What specifically are you asking? Its a great question. We say "I own my body" but what does that mean , exactly? what is it that owns the body? Does the body own the body? No, that doesnt make sense. Do thoughts of ownership, thoughts about me, own the body? no, they are just thoughts. When we say "I own my body" we are implicitly saying that there is some thing, some entity, external to the body, that owns the body. But what is this thing? Its an important question to consider. Does an object somehow change when it becomes owned, or change when it becomes owned by someone else? Is ownership anything other than a thought saying "I own this", or "He owns this, so I had better not take it"? A shared concept. Owning your body means you have exclusive control over your body. You would say "my own body" or my own lungs" or "my own brain" or "my own eyes". To OWN. Ownership. You have ownership over your body. Yes the body owns the body given that the mind is part of the body. That's why it's called self-ownership. There's no rational reason why the owner cannot also be the owned. We've just been brainwashed through thousands of years of rulers to reject this obvious fact.
neeeel Posted April 26, 2015 Posted April 26, 2015 Owning your body means you have exclusive control over your body. You would say "my own body" or my own lungs" or "my own brain" or "my own eyes". To OWN. Ownership. You have ownership over your body. Yes the body owns the body given that the mind is part of the body. That's why it's called self-ownership. There's rational reason why the owner cannot also be the owned. We've just been brainwashed thorough thousands of years of rulers to reject this obvious fact. So you are saying the mind owns the body?
Blackout Posted April 26, 2015 Posted April 26, 2015 If ownership of property comes from someones action in claiming that property, then if someone makes a claim to someone elses property they now own it. Sure this could continue ad infitium but that doesn't mean that ownership of property doesn't exist it is just constantly changing. In this case ownership is meaningless because it does not preclude anyone else from claiming what you "own". You devalued the concept by removing the privileges associated with it.
BoardGameFanatic Posted April 26, 2015 Author Posted April 26, 2015 In this case ownership is meaningless because it does not preclude anyone else from claiming what you "own". You devalued the concept by removing the privileges associated with it. I'm not sure where the privilege of exclusivity comes from though, I am happy to accept them if it could be explained why. What TheRobin said didn't explain where the exclusive rights originate. I'm not sure what you're talking about. What do you think "owning the consequences of your actions" means? Are you asking what is ownership or are you asking do we own something we steal? What specifically are you asking? Well originally this came from a joke from one of my flatmates who was trying to find some way for me to find a loophole in torrenting (i.e. stealing) digital comics, I'm not comfortable doing that no matter how control is defined because either way stealing is immoral. This lead to the question if you steal something do you own it? Which then lead to the question of defining ownership.
ProfessionalTeabagger Posted April 27, 2015 Posted April 27, 2015 So you are saying the mind owns the body? The mind is part of the the body so yes. That's why it's called "self-ownership".
Merrifield Posted April 27, 2015 Posted April 27, 2015 If I pick an apple off a tree that is not owned by anyone I own that apple by virtue of owning the consequences of my actions. If someone steals that apple from me do they not own it by the virtue of owning the consequences of their actions? Obviously this is immoral but I'm not sure if morality has anything to do with ownership.The apple is in a natural state and unowned. You pick it and as a result of your action claim ownership. Someone steals the apple from you and as a result of their action they now possess it, but do not own it. You still have the claim of ownership which does not require possession. If ownership of property comes from someones action in claiming that property, then if someone makes a claim to someone elses property they now own it. Sure this could continue ad infitium but that doesn't mean that ownership of property doesn't exist it is just constantly changing.The result of the action of making an unjust claim does not qualify as a transfer of the right of ownership. The ownership of a piece of property changes only when the owner consents.
Zerubbabel Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 "All the territorial possessions of all the political establishments in the earth--including America, of course-- consist of pilferings from other people's wash. No tribe, howsoever insignificant, and no nation, howsoever mighty occupies a foot of land that was not stolen." Mark Twain .
Recommended Posts