Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Plato's view of self identity
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Ownership
What is the relationship between ownership and self identity/development? This is a extremely complicated question. There are many theories trying to answer this question, such as, Plato 's claim the "owning objects is detrimental to a person 's character", whereas Aristotle argues that "ownership of tangible goods helps to develop moral character." To answer this question we must first ask, what is ownership? If this question is asked to friends, relatives, even strangers, we will receive many similar answers to this question. People will say something along the lines of, "the possession of an object" or "to be in control of something". However, we must then dive deeper into the question and ask ourselves, can we really possess an object if it can be taken
…show more content…
However, they play a key role in the formation of self identity. Human beings, as a member of the class mammalia, are one of very few species that raise their young. According to the National Wildlife Federation, less than ten percent of all mammals raise their young. This means the parents of fewer that ten percent of the species that are mammals, teach their child survival skills and social acceptability. The majority of humans raise their young to be polite, educated and social accepted according to society 's norm. As we grew, life would change us and shape our character and ways of thinking. Our thoughts are not our own, they are based off the influences of our surroundings and others influences. For example, if an adolescent is raised by parents and have friends that are fans of the New England Patriots, the odds are that when the adolescent grows into an adult, that person will most likely have a positive bias for the New England Patriots. When growing up children are sent to school to learn and regurgitate what society has accepted as truth. People 's thoughts are shaped to their surroundings and upbringing, and are therefore not their
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.
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.
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
It is one sad existence, to live and die, without discovering, what could have been. The question is often asked, what is the meaning of life? Or even, what is the purpose? There is no clear answer, and yet there is a search in every moment, every breath, and every corner, for a minute hint. In a societal setting, identity is merely determined by the amount of tangible things owned. Society places the ideology on individuals that those who own the most tangible things are above others. An individual can trump all those societal values by owning the self. This brings equality to all, and levels the playing field. This has been true throughout history, however behind all of this, there are individuals learning to conquer themselves. It begs the question, what defines a person, the physical or the metaphysical? There is obviously a compelling relationship between ownership and the sense of self or identity. But, is it ownership that determines the sense of self or is it perhaps, that the sense of self determines ownership. The
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 the act, state, or right of possessing something. Many people believe taking ownership is parallel to taking responsibility. In some cases, taking responsibility can be rewarding, but in other cases, it can be very self centered. According to Aristotle, ownership of tangible objects leads to develop moral character, even though it is not stated whether those morals are good or bad. Plato exaggerates how disparaging ownership can be to one's character and life. The affect ownership obtains on moral character is intensely detrimental.
Ownership and self (identity) are commonly joined together under one thought: ownership can very well define a person’s identity. I believe that is to be true. It is possible to own something physically whether that is a phone, a computer, a car etc., or something that simply exists within our minds such as a thought (idea), a concept or whatever it may be. However, “To own” – a verb – doesn’t necessarily mean to own or have something, it also means to know something or that it is a part of you or “admit or acknowledge that something is the case or that one feels a certain way”- Google. Affluential philosophers have argued the various ways of how to express ownership and possession that shows its universality on this well rounded topic. It’s claimed that it builds up moral character and denounced by its undesirable and detrimental effects – good or evil. It is, in fact, that ownership and its intricacy builds both and individual self-comprehension and group- identity.
What is personal identity? This question has been asked and debated by philosophers for centuries. The problem of personal identity is determining what conditions and qualities are necessary and sufficient for a person to exist as the same being at one time as another. Some think personal identity is physical, taking a materialistic perspective believing that bodily continuity or physicality is what makes a person a person with the view that even mental things are caused by some kind of physical occurrence. Others take a more idealist approach with the belief that mental continuity is the sole factor in establishing personal identity holding that physical things are just reflections of the mind. One more perspective on personal identity and the one I will attempt to explain and defend in this paper is that personal identity requires both physical and psychological continuity; my argument is as follows:
Social institutions, like educational and religious groups, enhance rule obedience and contribute to the formation of identity and sense of belonging to certain groups. People possess a set of beliefs that condition their everyday behavior, like one can think that education is the most important four our future, while other people might believe that staying at home and raising their children is their reality. However, our beliefs are influenced by the groups that we interact. For instance, if we join a feminist movement, we might start reflecting a positive attitude towards gender equality. This illustrates how our social interaction can influence or beliefs related to race, and gender. Similarly, religious institutions and
The view of identity seems to be defined by facial features and social constructed views. Depending on the recent look of someone it may just be more then just color but also background. In this essay I will explain how I relate to some recent views based on philosophers I may agree and disagree with in order to describe my identity. Identity is much more then just being labeled as a race, it can be based on much more.
The identity theory of mind holds that states and processes of the mind are identical to states and processes of the brain thus particular psychological states are identical with particular type of physical state. Many objections have been lay out by philosophers who have evaluated this theory one objection that is particularly strong is the Martian and octopus criticism which state that if identity theory is true, than these species should not feel pain, but if they do feel pain than identity theory is not true.
A person 's beginnings do not completely define a person, but it does serve as a permanent foundation from which their identity is built around. As children, we absorb every sight and experience like porous sponges. Family, religion, environment, culture -- all of these aspects slowly form the background of one 's identity. As an Asian American, this identity is very different from that of a native Chinese woman 's, for I have parts of both cultures within me. It is a unique identity which I believes acts as a double edged sword. Being born into two cultures is a wonderful in that one can be a part of two cultures, but it is also a very confusing to be "divided" between two very different cultures.
Everyone is prejudice in some way or another. From a young age individuals observe, or are taught discrimination against others. Whether it is because of religion, sexuality, race, gender, personality, or just someone’s way of life, everyone is biased. In many ways, who we are today, is influenced by our race, ethnicity, and culture, and overall our individual identities. Every experience, positive or negative, has an impact on how we react to something in the future. Decisions others make, can impact the way we interact with others, our personal beliefs, and all together our life experiences. Along our path of life, we meet people with different goals and circumstances they’ve encountered which make them who they are and why they do certain things a certain way. But our experiences
As a child enters into the adolescent years, a common change in behaviour occurs in where they actively seek new/ unusual experiences, display an increase in desire to take risks and become more accustomed to developing strong bonds with people to which they are not related (increased social behaviours). Interestingly, this change in behaviour can be seen across all social mammal species, likely due to the evolutionary need for adolescents to gain and develop the skills they require to exist independently, to become - in the case of humans - a self-sufficient member of the adult
Who am I? Wrestling with identity— our history, our culture, our language— is central to being human, and there’s no better way to come to grips with questions of identity than through the crossing of borders. The transcendence of borders reveals the fluid nature of identity, it challenges absurd notions of rigid nationalities, and highlights our common humanity. It is no coincidence, then, that my experience as an immigrant has shaped my academic journey and pushed me to pursue graduate studies.