By definition, ownership is the act, state, or moral right of possessing something, and for the sake of reference something we be referred to as an object. It defines who we are in this society, what social class we fall into, what goals we set for ourselves in order to obtain something just as it also denotes the status of our prowess, and the result of our actions. Such a definition cannot be proven for it is an interoperation based on observations; nonetheless it is considered a moral right by most such as freedom of speech and self-defense. For instance most laws against stealing will condemn a criminal for stealing even if the criminal gets away with the crime because the thef committed a crime, and most people think stealing is wrong …show more content…
By saying that owning an object is detrimental, Plato establishes the idea that by giving an object a sense of ownership, a person will be more likely to care about the object greatly. When this occurs that natural human response would be to prevent losing ownership of the object, and when that becomes a difficult task, a person will be more likely to resort to “un-moral” means in order to protect their ownership in spite of their character. Although Plato’s explanation for ownership is logical and may have been true for his time, it fails to account for the moral factor that makes ownership just, acknowledgment, which without would not prove whenever or not a person’s character has declined for morality is system of values that involves a …show more content…
If one person were to know something thoroughly then according to Jean, that person would own it, thus its definition of moral possession would also apply. However that brings up an interesting point, if ownership requires morality among a society then can an intangible object be “own”. For this occur a society must define the ownership of that intangible object to which one seeking ownership would oblige to. For example, in order to “own” the skill of playing a piano, one might say that a person must learn all the keys of a piano to refer to when reading a sheet of music, however another more skilled pianist may say that in order to own the skill of playing a piano, one must be able to play anything in perfect synchronization with their sheet of music. When these different interpretation of ownership conflict with one another, then the concept of ownership becomes rather confusing. The person seeking to own the skill may set their own belief about ownership, but at the same time someone else may argue against that belief, thus making the idea of owning a intangible object subject to debate, unless both the person seeking ownership and those that will witness the claim, acknowledge the moral state of
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.
In his Plato’s Republic Socrates tries to find the values of an ideal city in order to rightly define justice. Although I agree with most of his ideals for the city, there are also many that I disagree with. Some of his ideas that I accept are that women should be able to share the same responsibilities as the men, having women and children in common, , the recognition of honor based on the self rather than heredity, that the best philosophers are useless to the multitudes, and the philosopher / king as a ruler. I disagree with his views on censorship, having assigned positions in society, his views on democracy, and that art cannot be a respectable occupation.
Plato’s Republic was a Socratic Dialogue discussing justice and the perfect State. Today, I will summarize, evaluate, and show application for our society in Book V of Plato’s Republic, “On Matrimony and Philosophy.”
World War I set the stage for instability and destruction of what World War II anticipated. In 1939, Hitler invaded Poland and within two days France and Britain declared war on Germany which begun World War II. With an estimated death total of 35 to 60 million, 6 million included Jews who were taken by Nazi’s. Two days after Hitler committed suicide Germany surrenders to the Western Allies followed by the Soviets. September 2, 1945 declared the final ending of World War II.
Plato was a dominant moral philosopher in the ancient world. In Plato’s time, Athens had been rocked by the Peloponnesian War and political chaos after its defeat by Sparta (Bagnall, 2006, pp. 29-38). Perchance these events influenced Plato to search for answers that would bring harmony and clarity. It is important to note that Plato’s idea of justice is more in line with the New Testament’s interpretation of justice. The Greek word “dikaiosune” or righteousness, is what the bible translates to mean justice. Plato’s belief was that the root of justice or moral conduct, relied heavily on another worldly belief. “That process is the recollection of the things
While freedom is a wonderful thing, there are other things in this world that can be more important than freedom. During the first third of Christianity and Culture in Dialogue, we read many stories about what other communities besides our own love and what binds them together.. While we have read several texts from many authors, the first author’s was the one that I found the most compelling when talking about what communities love. In Plato’s Crito, Socrates is in jail for corrupting the youth and for not believing in the proper gods. While he is there, his friend comes to offer him a plan of escape to avoid being executed. Everything was set, the life he would soon lead was planned, and the guards were already paid for his escape. However
The reason that unreasonable restrictions on the individual's interests cannot be entirely ignored is that human nature doesn't allow for such selflessness. Since that is so, citizens will not allow for common good to exist in a society if it as the expense of their interests. However, small restrictions can be readily accepted it they believe that such impositions actually affords them the safety and opportunity to nurture their interests. For example, the property owner will gladly pay taxes to the government for the common good if they believe that the government will protect them those who would steal their land. In Aristotle's critic of Plato, Aristotle points out that humans cannot learn what the common good and what their proper role in society is without having individual interests. For example, Aristotle pokes holes in Plato's position that philosophers should not possess personal property as irrational as it does not take into consideration that property ownership "contributes to the overall rational structure of society and thus to people's happiness," which is a requirement before the common good can be realized. Aristotle's criticism of Plato hinges on the presupposition that personal happiness must exist before civic virtue can. Accordingly, family, friendship, and personal property are "needed in order to enable individuals to feel that their lives have value, and both are necessary dimensions of a well-organized polis that secures a sense of communal solidarity among diverse people" (DeLue 54).
Owners of real, intellectual and personal property each have the same rights under the law, whether it is a physical entity or a non-physical entity. “Ownership of real property is typically complicated than that of the personal or intellectual property since the law provides for different forms of ownership, which carry different rights (Roger, 2012). First, real property is regulated by federal and state statutes as well as common law. For example, a fee simple individual that has
Property can include clothing, your car, your jewelry, your books and papers. The right to property is not the right to take it from others; this would interfere with their property rights. It is rather the right to work for it, to obtain non-coercively the money or services which you can present in voluntary exchanges. For example, depriving people of property is depriving them of the means by which they live, the freedom of the individual citizen to do what he wishes in his own life and to plan for the future. Without the right to property, the right to life itself amounts to little.
Private property is prohibited among the guardians, for they are meant to survive on the rations of the state (Plato 415c). Collective ownership was allowed, for it promoted common pursuits of common interests. For Plato, ari...
According to Aristotle, ownership of tangible goods can help to develop one’s moral character. I agree with his philosophy. Owning an object or other goods helps one to discover certain virtues, such as responsibility or purpose in caring for what you own. All objects you own, you must acquire, either through purchasing or through gift. Depending on how you acquire the object, defines its value, either monetary or sentimental. These different values help to develop one’s sense of self, as one grows as a person and develops one’s moral character. By learning these important skills, such as responsibility and purpose, one has a better understanding of oneself.
Plato’s Republic introduces a multitude of important and interesting concepts, of topics ranging from music, to gender equality, to political regime. For this reason, many philosophers and scholars still look back to The Republic in spite of its age. Yet one part that stands out in particular is Plato’s discussion of the soul in the fourth book of the Republic. Not only is this section interesting, but it was also extremely important for all proceeding moral philosophy, as Plato’s definition has been used ever since as a standard since then. Plato’s confabulation on the soul contains three main portions: defining each of the three parts and explanation of their functions, description of the interaction of the parts, and then how the the parts and their interaction motivate action. This essay will investigate each segment, and seek to explain their importance.
Part I With a philosophical question at hand one question that has puzzled the minds of many religious figures for decades is Socrates with his writings on “does god love it because its holy? Or is it holy because it is loved by god?” The significance of his question is that that does the object have value within itself or is the value given by the seeker of that item. Many of the conundrums presented today are also trying to give value based on one or the other. When it’s understandable to choose one or the other.
Plato’s view of division of labour is divided into three types of peoples’ task in life which are workers as farmers, military type and guardians. Actually, the ruling task of Plato’s Republic is the guardian’s responsible who had achieved the greatest wisdom or knowledge of good. Due to that, Plato claims that “philosopher must become kings or those now who called kings must genuinely and adequately philosophise’’ (Nussbaum1998, p.18). However, people argue about the reasons that the philosopher should rule the city, while the philosophers prefer to gain knowledge instead of power, thus they don’t seek this authority. Therefore, the argument should alter to why the philosophers are the best ruler to govern people. Indeed, Plato states much evidence to prove his view. Firstly, these kinds of kings are interested in simple life and helping people for better communication. Secondly, as Plato points out that each type of workers has a deficiency and conflict in his erotic attachments such as a worker is a lover of money, but the philosopher is a devotee of wisdom and knowledge. Thirdly, their disapproving of being a king comes from their fear of being unjust (Nussbaum, 1998).Not only these evidence does Plato claim, but he also adds the characteristics of being a king and the education system of philosophy.
Plato’s idea on the self is very simple yet complex. He has a different way of talking, which means that he either tells you what he means or he contradicts himself. He starts off saying that the soul, psyche, is the “thing” that causes things to be alive, but then says that “I” equals my soul. Does that mean that I cause myself to be alive? That thought can be very contradicting and complicated to understand. He then goes and says that the soul is different from the body. This thought is very complicated and makes Plato’s words very contradicting. On the other hand, Plato’s idea of self can be simple to understand if we take another view on it. We know that two things are constant in Plato’s search to find the answers for the soul and these