If we lived in a world without evil, would there be ownership?
Not to define evil too specifically, but as a starting point, is ownership indelibly linked to violence, death and scarcity? If there is a heaven, will it include ownership in its ultimate sinless state?
A heaven with no ownership would be a questionable proposition by my lights. Can someone take "the clothes off my back?" (assuming that idea has some sort of rational parallel in heaven?)
Perhaps the Bible gets it right when it points to covetousness, rather than ownership, as being the root of the problems arising from property.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A limit of time is fixed for thee
Which if thou dost not use for clearing away the clouds from thy mind
It will go and thou wilt go, never to return.
Not to define evil too specifically, but as a starting point, is ownership indelibly linked to violence, death and scarcity? If there is a heaven, will it include ownership in its ultimate sinless state?
Scarcity necessitates ownership as (arguably) a means of curtailing violence. In a post-scarcity economy, that necessity of ownership of things would become largely obsolete, except maybe in cases of objects with strong personal meaning.
Of course, human minds are unique, so there's always a scarcity of interesting ideas and talents. Heaven gets around that by stripping individuality as well, so there really isn't scarcity of anything. Everyone just... I dunno, stands around and praises God all the time.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Do I Contradict Myself? Very Well Then I Contradict Myself.
Heaven gets around that by stripping individuality as well, so there really isn't scarcity of anything. Everyone just... I dunno, stands around and praises God all the time.
I suspect I know the scripture you read, and I challenge this assertion.
Ownership in some form always exists for every object. For ownership not to exist the object in question has to not exist. Is existence the root of all evil?
"I have no idea what it's like not to be a straight white male, and the experiences of others are irrelevant." -Conservative Motto
Calling someone a Commie is flaming and must be stopped, but turning the word Conservative into a loaded pejorative and using it over and over again is perfectly acceptable.
Ownership in some form always exists for every object. For ownership not to exist the object in question has to not exist. Is existence the root of all evil?
If we lived in a world without evil, would there be ownership?
Not to define evil too specifically, but as a starting point, is ownership indelibly linked to violence, death and scarcity? If there is a heaven, will it include ownership in its ultimate sinless state?
By what logic do you connect ownership to violence, death, and scarcity?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"If you're Havengul problems I feel bad for you son, I got 99 problems and a Lich ain't one." - FSM
"In a world where money talks, silence is horrifying."
By what logic do you connect ownership to violence, death, and scarcity?
If we did not need to sustain our lives with stuff like food, water or shelter, what would we need to own?
Taylor beat me to it, but even moreso, what use is it to fight to claim an unknown rock asteroid orbiting an undiscovered planet?
I can see a theological approach to your view, Commons; Everything is owned by God. "All the gold and silver are Mine." But it also bears a profound view of the ultimate liberty: What use would a Creator of all universes have for gold and silver?
It's the opposite. Ownership is needed to prevent violence in a scarce world (@Valros beat me!).
Without commonly known and accepted ownership rules, people would entitle then-self with all things they want. As soon as multiple individual entitle then-self to the same object, conflict will arise.
I don't think evil have a single root because there are different kinds of evils, so each one would have it's own unique root. Also I don't get concept of "root" (by "root" you mean cause?).
It's the opposite. Ownership is needed to prevent violence in a scarce world.
I don't think evil have a single root because there are different kinds of evils, so each one would have it's own unique root. Also I don't get concept of "root" (by "root" you mean cause?).
Well, i still say no to the original question. If anything, ownership prevent some violence.
Ownership is needed to prevent violence in a scarce world (@Valros beat me!).
Without commonly known and accepted ownership rules, people would entitle then-self with all things they want. As soon as multiple individual entitle then-self to the same object, conflict would arise.
Some people say that ownership rules are never respected because of knowledge of it's existence and acceptance but by of force, which i disagree. Force plays a role when people don't agree to the same ownership terms and one try to get something other consider under it's right. But people accepting the same rules can live in peace, that's obvious.
Some people say that ownership rules are never respected because of knowledge of it's existence and acceptance but by of force, which i disagree. Force plays a role when people don't agree to the same ownership terms and one try to get something other consider under it's right. But people accepting the same rules can live in peace, that's obvious.
Makes sense.
Do you think a context of infinite space and time would undermine ownership?
Some people say that ownership rules are never respected because of knowledge of it's existence and acceptance but by of force, which i disagree. Force plays a role when people don't agree to the same ownership terms and one try to get something other consider under it's right. But people accepting the same rules can live in peace, that's obvious.
Makes sense.
Do you think a context of infinite space and time would undermine ownership?
I honestly don't know the consequences of 'infinite space and time' to the matters of scarcity and ownership.
It is not clear to me that the assumption of infinite resources, on its own, would undermine the concept of ownership even in the slightest.
Forget heaven for the moment, because really, it's a logic knot that can undermine any example. Instead imagine a world that is like ours, only with infinite space and the infinite, free ability to produce matter.
There are still things that I would not be comfortable sharing with other people at all (my toothbrush, my underwear), and there are still things that, while shareable in principle, I would expect to have exclusive rights to at my whim. (my bedroom, my television) Indeed, the presence of infinite resources and absence of scarcity makes "That's mine, just go get your own" a completely viable answer to any situation of contention -- it reinforces ownership rather than undermining it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A limit of time is fixed for thee
Which if thou dost not use for clearing away the clouds from thy mind
It will go and thou wilt go, never to return.
There are still things that I would not be comfortable sharing with other people at all (my toothbrush, my underwear), and there are still things that, while shareable in principle, I would expect to have exclusive rights to at my whim. (my bedroom, my television) Indeed, the presence of infinite resources and absence of scarcity makes "That's mine, just go get your own" a completely viable answer to any situation of contention -- it reinforces ownership rather than undermining it.
Being attached (emotionally, hygienically, any reason) to a object creates scarcity. If you evaluate your toothbrush different then any toothbrush, then your toothbrush is unique, and if it's a unique object for you it's already scarce.
A non scarce universe would be a strange one since every trait of every object could be freely replicated by all. For example if a girl you like sign your black lotus with a lip stick kiss, that same card would be instantly available to all.
A non-scarce universe also have the absence of ownership as prerequisite since ownership is a characteristic of a object. If you have ownership of your t.v. and some stalker wants YOUR t.v. then the only way the t.v. is not scarce for him is if you can share it.
People should really look into what they are talking about when they talk about 'post scarcity economy' lol
It is not clear to me that the assumption of infinite resources, on its own, would undermine the concept of ownership even in the slightest.
Forget heaven for the moment, because really, it's a logic knot that can undermine any example. Instead imagine a world that is like ours, only with infinite space and the infinite, free ability to produce matter.
There are still things that I would not be comfortable sharing with other people at all (my toothbrush, my underwear), and there are still things that, while shareable in principle, I would expect to have exclusive rights to at my whim. (my bedroom, my television) Indeed, the presence of infinite resources and absence of scarcity makes "That's mine, just go get your own" a completely viable answer to any situation of contention -- it reinforces ownership rather than undermining it.
Great points.
If one believes:
In the bodily resurrection of Christ and
That this resurrection is extended to others
Principles of a "golden highway" as evidenced in Acts 8
Then one arrives at a similar situation to the one you describe (that is, access to infinite time and space in a physical reality) with one exception: I am unaware of a scriptural indication that the saints will be able to spontaneously generate existence.
So considering that we take your hypothetical sans the spontaneous genesis:
Items such as toothbrushes and underwear would relate to a post-fall existence. What constitutes a "robe of glory"? I will mention the buck-naked folks running around pre-fall (also check out the Gospel of Thomas and the parable of the children in the king's field).
How long would one hold interest in any particular item?
If I had an interesting non-unique item, given infinite time and motion, how long before I chance upon a similar instance of that item?
If I had an interesting unique item, what would I do with it?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Not to define evil too specifically, but as a starting point, is ownership indelibly linked to violence, death and scarcity? If there is a heaven, will it include ownership in its ultimate sinless state?
Perhaps the Bible gets it right when it points to covetousness, rather than ownership, as being the root of the problems arising from property.
Which if thou dost not use for clearing away the clouds from thy mind
It will go and thou wilt go, never to return.
It is no secret that all wars, and essentially all conflicts in human history, are driven simply by the fear of "not having enough"
Scarcity necessitates ownership as (arguably) a means of curtailing violence. In a post-scarcity economy, that necessity of ownership of things would become largely obsolete, except maybe in cases of objects with strong personal meaning.
Of course, human minds are unique, so there's always a scarcity of interesting ideas and talents. Heaven gets around that by stripping individuality as well, so there really isn't scarcity of anything. Everyone just... I dunno, stands around and praises God all the time.
Very Well Then I Contradict Myself.
I suspect I know the scripture you read, and I challenge this assertion.
Flame infraction. - Blinking Spirit
Calling someone a Commie is flaming and must be stopped, but turning the word Conservative into a loaded pejorative and using it over and over again is perfectly acceptable.
Who owns Cygnus X-1?
By what logic do you connect ownership to violence, death, and scarcity?
"In a world where money talks, silence is horrifying."
Ashcoat Bear of Limited
If we did not need to sustain our lives with stuff like food, water or shelter, what would we need to own?
Taylor beat me to it, but even moreso, what use is it to fight to claim an unknown rock asteroid orbiting an undiscovered planet?
I can see a theological approach to your view, Commons; Everything is owned by God. "All the gold and silver are Mine." But it also bears a profound view of the ultimate liberty: What use would a Creator of all universes have for gold and silver?
Without commonly known and accepted ownership rules, people would entitle then-self with all things they want. As soon as multiple individual entitle then-self to the same object, conflict will arise.
I don't think evil have a single root because there are different kinds of evils, so each one would have it's own unique root. Also I don't get concept of "root" (by "root" you mean cause?).
BGU Control
R Aggro
Standard - For Fun
BG Auras
No, I mean it is sustained by it.
Some people say that ownership rules are never respected because of knowledge of it's existence and acceptance but by of force, which i disagree. Force plays a role when people don't agree to the same ownership terms and one try to get something other consider under it's right. But people accepting the same rules can live in peace, that's obvious.
BGU Control
R Aggro
Standard - For Fun
BG Auras
Makes sense.
Do you think a context of infinite space and time would undermine ownership?
I honestly don't know the consequences of 'infinite space and time' to the matters of scarcity and ownership.
BGU Control
R Aggro
Standard - For Fun
BG Auras
Forget heaven for the moment, because really, it's a logic knot that can undermine any example. Instead imagine a world that is like ours, only with infinite space and the infinite, free ability to produce matter.
There are still things that I would not be comfortable sharing with other people at all (my toothbrush, my underwear), and there are still things that, while shareable in principle, I would expect to have exclusive rights to at my whim. (my bedroom, my television) Indeed, the presence of infinite resources and absence of scarcity makes "That's mine, just go get your own" a completely viable answer to any situation of contention -- it reinforces ownership rather than undermining it.
Which if thou dost not use for clearing away the clouds from thy mind
It will go and thou wilt go, never to return.
Being attached (emotionally, hygienically, any reason) to a object creates scarcity. If you evaluate your toothbrush different then any toothbrush, then your toothbrush is unique, and if it's a unique object for you it's already scarce.
A non scarce universe would be a strange one since every trait of every object could be freely replicated by all. For example if a girl you like sign your black lotus with a lip stick kiss, that same card would be instantly available to all.
A non-scarce universe also have the absence of ownership as prerequisite since ownership is a characteristic of a object. If you have ownership of your t.v. and some stalker wants YOUR t.v. then the only way the t.v. is not scarce for him is if you can share it.
People should really look into what they are talking about when they talk about 'post scarcity economy' lol
BGU Control
R Aggro
Standard - For Fun
BG Auras
Great points.
If one believes:
So considering that we take your hypothetical sans the spontaneous genesis: