Plato's Explanation Of Ownership

940 Words2 Pages

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

Open Document