Assessment of the Statement that Property is a Power Relationship Between People
Property is the right to possess, enjoy or use a determinant thing,
and includes the right of excluding others from doing the same. The
concept of ownership or property has no single or widely accepted
definition. Like any other concept it has great weight in public
discourse and the popular usage varies broadly. Property is frequently
conceived as a 'bundle of rights and obligations.' Property is
stressed as not a relationship between people and things, but a
relationship between people with regard to things. It is often
conceptualized that property is the rights of 'ownership'.
In common law property is divided into real property, which is the
interests in land and improvements there, and personal property, which
are interests in anything other than real property. Personal property
is divided into tangible property (such as a bike, car and clothse),
and intangible property (such as bonds and stocks), which also
includes intellectual property (copyrights, trademarks etc). The
modern property rights conceive of possession and ownership as
belonging to legal individuals, even if the individual is not a real
person. Hence, governments, corporations and other collective forms of
ownership are shown in terms of individual ownership. Property rights
can be found in the oldest laws written, and equate the expectation of
use or profit to some payment from the very beginning. Modern property
rights can be said to begin with the transition from ownership by
entities as being the primary form of property right, to the theory
that property rights are to promote th...
... middle of paper ...
...operty’ in the case of
Goldberg v. Kelly to be protected. This shows the state evolving in
order to protect the citizen’s rights. As pointed out by Professor
C.B. Macpherson (Essential Reading Handout p.5), property can be seen
as a political relation between people. A relation that is, unlike
marriage or contracts, relatively hard to get into and leave. These
can include new property such as a job or a group of friends. This
creates a power relation between the people and the thing (between
subject and an object). Therefore the statement ‘Property is a power
relationship between people’ is true but it would be better if we
portrayed it as a relationship between people with regard to things.
In transition to the stages of social development the relations
between the people have become more powerfull and more important.
Examples of such viewpoints can be found through the works of many great thinkers throughout the centuries, some dating back to 400 years BCE. A Greek philosopher who developed his viewpoint on ownership was Plato. Plato, being the student of Socrates, was very well educated in philosophical thinking, and he applied his superior knowledge to an analysis of ownership. Plato’s views on ownership entailed the idea that owning objects is detrimental to a person 's character. He believed that the possession of materialistic goods actually damaged a person’s morality. Another Ancient Greek philosopher who would apply his knowledge to the relationship of ownership was Aristotle. Aristotle was Plato’s most successful and intelligent student. Aristotle used the knowledge he had acquired from his mentor to create his own viewpoints which completely contradicted the ideas laid out by Plato. Aristotle said that ownership of tangible goods helps to develop moral character. In other words, Aristotle believed that the possession of materialistic goods could, in fact, help in the development of one’s moral character. One of the more recent philosophers which will be discussed is Jean-Paul Sartre. Sartre believed that ownership extends beyond objects to include intangible things as well. In this way, Sartre is working very closely with the Theory of
in which property is owned by the state or group, to be shared in common
People who are called philosophers have sat around for centuries, discussing how ownership relates to identity. Philosophers have talked and made claims, but no one has ever been able to give an exact definition of ownership or identity, since there is not one. What philosophers have determined is a connection of character, which is moral, and the other has to do with detrimental effects. These two rational reasons show a positive and negative interaction, but that is not the point with which to relate ownership of identity. The point with which to relate ownership to identity is the aspect of building an individual sense and a group sense of belonging to something. Look at human beings, for example, peop...
Ownership is a claim living things make which expresses possession. It is a natural instinct to stake your claim, or in other words ‘mark your territory’, thus the action is highly visible in our lives. Ownership is commonly thought of in relation to possession of physical objects, but it can also relate to the possession of skills or ideas, a concept contemplated by philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre. The phenomenon of ownership has varying outcomes; in some cases possession brings forth unpleasant greed and malice. But at other times claiming objects or ideas increases personal pride, and increases ability, knowledge and camaraderie. Aristotle agrees with this, and theorizes that owning something positive boosts personal character. Contrastingly,
Property is a fear people have of losing. Physical property that you own isn’t always safe; it can be taken away in a matter of seconds. Less tangible possessions such as, someone’s independence, ideas, love, freedom, even respect and dignity is worth more of a scare. Dignity, worthiness, is what makes a person who they are. Respect, a person’s quality, is what gets a person to be who they are. Unfortunately, if a person is subtracted from both their dignity and respect, not always will they get it back.
People work hard in life so that they can own property and after acquiring the property, they need the property to be protected from those with intentions of taking it away. The process of property acquisition may entail legal and illegal activities. While acquiring the property people are supposed to ensure that they use just means.
In the seventeenth-century, England was recovering from the "Glorious Revolution" and political thought centered on the issues of nature and the limits of government. Two great political thinkers, John Locke and Thomas Hobbes took a scientific approach to analyze government and focused on the state of nature and natural rights of individuals. Locke was particularly interested in property and governments role in the protection of property. He believed that God gave the world to men to use common, but also gave them reason to make the best use of it (Locke 17). According to Locke, the best use of the land and resources involved gaining property, using the word in a narrow sense. He also used the term 'property' in a broad sense, which he defined as people's "lives, liberties, and estates" (75). A French thinker in the eighteenth-century, Jean-Jacques Rousseau basically agreed with Locke on the definition of property in a narrow sense, but took an opposing view to Locke's regarding the effects property had on society. Rousseau was a Romanticist and believed that property was the first aspect of injustice. The opposing views of Locke and Rousseau are obvious in their respective works, Second Treatise of Government and Discourse of the Origin of Inequality.
In 1787, delegates representing twelve out of the thirteen met to try to create a stronger central government for America. At this time the Constitution of the United States was written. On of the main priorities in writing the Constitution was to guard against tyranny. Tyranny in government is defined as harsh, absolute, power in one individual's hands. The constitution guarded against tyranny by creating a system of separation of powers, large states vs small states, checks and balances, and federalism.
The concept of private property is of keen concern in the study of political theory. Most of the philosophers gave considerable attention to this subject. Man claim for the property can be traced back in to ancient times, even the classic Greek Philosopher like Plato and Aristotle talked about the institution of property. Plato explained how the acquisition of private property leads toward corruption and became a hurdle in the way of a just society. He divided the individuals into three different categories and also emphasized for subject and function specialization. Plato was in the favor of Family and Property communism since he believed that they are those institutions who paved the ground for further corruption in the system.
Governments provide the legal and social framework in market economies by establishing and protecting the rights to private property and to the economic gains derived from the use of that property. The government's protection of private property extends to land, factories, stores, as well as intellectual property. Intellectual properties are protected by exclusive rights, called copyrights, to protect such things as books, music, films, and computer software programs, etc; or patents, protect other types of inventions, designs, products, and manufacturing processes. These exclusive issued rights give the holders the rights to sell or market their products and creations for a specified period of time.
Max Weber developed a concept of power explaining 3 sources of it. Relatively to sources he distinguished charismatic, traditional and legal types of authority. Richard Emerson continued to work on the concept of power. He studies power-dependence relation and looks deeper on its nature. Emerson explains that dependency of one subject - B (person or group) from the other subject A (person or group) develops, when there is a desirable goal or need and limitation on its availability and when subject A can facilitate in reaching of this goal. At the same moment subject A develop a power upon subject B. The definition of power suggested in the article is an ability to overcome resistance. Thus subject A can force subject B to overcome resistance to something that he does not want to do in exchange of a desirable goal or reward. The goal in this context could be love or friendship or any other thing that can be a valuable yet unavailable for one and
1. You ask me what is poverty? Listen to me. Here I am, dirty, smelly and with no "proper" underwear on and with the stench of my rotting teeth near you. I will tell you. Listen to me. Listen without pity. I cannot use your pity. Listen with understanding. Put yourself in my pity, worn out, ill-fitting shoes, and hear me.
Though the origins of the phrase are unknown, women around the world have been saying, “the personal is the political and the political is personal” for the past few decades. It is still applicable today when analyzing social movements and the structure of power in society. This phrase does not mean that a woman’s every action is considered to be political and that every personal decision made is political. Instead, the theory could be explained, in terms of overall feminism, by saying personal problems are political problems that are the result of a long period of seemingly innate repression. We often consider the political and personal to be completely separate entities. However, the political’s inherent blend with the personal only makes the political stronger and more powerful. This phrase is useful for understanding the rationale behind those involved with French torture and cruelty in an Algiers prison in The Question, persecution and oppression in a West Bank village in Budrus, and the discrimination against Muslim women in France in Politics of the Veil.
Before taking this class, my understanding between each individual and the whole society is that every individuals as the gear are connected together to become a society like a machine. That is, human beings build the society. However, the class gave me bigger view of the relationship between the people and the society. Discussing about the relationship between me and the broader social world is based on how all human beings and the broader social world effect together. Thus, I am going to show my understanding from the class and reading about the interaction between each individual and the whole society.
In other words ownership means sense of self responsibility. Even if the pioneer of the Confucianism, Confucius said “The objects that one owned in the past, currently owning, and wants to own show the sense of oneself” in his eminent work, “Analects,” simply owning something doesn’t show one’s characteristics but the sense of responsibility of owning something shows one self. This notion will be supported by two celebrities that have very different ways of treating their possessions and being responsible for their property, Angelina Jolie and Justin Bieber.