Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people?

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Mon Jun 22, 2020 10:49 am

The "Western" (U.S. American, Post-modern, Liberal) conception of "Ownership" has a blind-spot, when it comes to human beings.

People, by common sense, know what Ownership is, the difference between Private and Public property. People will even admit, that people "own themselves", insuchthat it is your body, and so your "Right" to do with your body and yourself as you see fit. This is a necessary aspect of Freedom and Liberty. But to convey ownership, of one person over and above another, is flagrant and denied. Thus the same ones espousing such freedoms, liberty, "rights", justice, etc. will conveniently ignore and deny the matter, when it comes to common sense, such as a parent 'owning' his/her own flesh-and-blood child.

As-if a mother does not in fact own her own child??? Ridiculous.

It's also clarified here, immediately, how many of these responses, how many here, are childless, and do not have their own children. Because if you did, or someday wanted to, then you would be forced to admit to Nature, Instinct, Reflex, which is the possession of parent to child. Children are the property of their parents, the most vital and important one of all.
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2520
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Mon Jun 22, 2020 12:03 pm

Urwrongx1000 wrote:The "Western" (U.S. American, Post-modern, Liberal) conception of "Ownership" has a blind-spot, when it comes to human beings.

People, by common sense, know what Ownership is, the difference between Private and Public property. People will even admit, that people "own themselves", insuchthat it is your body, and so your "Right" to do with your body and yourself as you see fit. This is a necessary aspect of Freedom and Liberty. But to convey ownership, of one person over and above another, is flagrant and denied. Thus the same ones espousing such freedoms, liberty, "rights", justice, etc. will conveniently ignore and deny the matter, when it comes to common sense, such as a parent 'owning' his/her own flesh-and-blood child.

As-if a mother does not in fact own her own child??? Ridiculous.

It's also clarified here, immediately, how many of these responses, how many here, are childless, and do not have their own children. Because if you did, or someday wanted to, then you would be forced to admit to Nature, Instinct, Reflex, which is the possession of parent to child. Children are the property of their parents, the most vital and important one of all.
I'm not childless. I own things not people, not even my child. I have exclusive rights in relation to my child, but that does not mean I own him. (that was one of you implied but not actually written out ideas and it doesn't work).

Here's what i notice. Instead of actually responding to anything I wrote, you just make statements and assumptions. Try to fucking sell your kid. I can sell everything I own. Everything. I can't sell my kid, legally or morally in relation to society. It's not an ownership issue.

Ownership:
Ownership is the state or fact of exclusive rights and control over property, which may be any asset, including an object, land or real estate, or intellectual property.
Things or ideas. Not people.

Property is what is owned: property is
an object or objects that belong to someone:


People are precisely not objects in modern law.

I own a doll, I can legally rip it's head off. I cannot do that to my child.
I can sell the doll.
People can even buy dolls to have sex with. They can sell that doll for an hour to some other guy to have violent sex with it. They go to prison and even in prison culture get killed if they do that to a child.

Even murderers and rapists know the difference between a doll and a child. The former being an object, the latter not.

I notice this with posters like you. Instead of actually interacting with other people's arguments - you know, doing the work of philosophical or intellectual interaction - you just spout your position, throw in assumptions, and seem to think this is a response. Nice appeal to incredulity in the middle there about mothers not owning their children.

The holes in your ability to think and discuss ideas with other people are glaring. Smugness built on nothing.

I can take a hammer to every single thing I own, by right, in the law. Ownership is a legal term for our relationship to

THINGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OBJECTS AND THE LIKE.

The mother you barf your incredulity around does not have to worry about anyone else owning her child. She and the father have rights, legally in relation to that child. But they are not ownership rights.

You're still a boring ass who can't argue his way out of a paper doily.

Or, actually, perhaps you can. You seem intelligent. But you either don't understand what an argument or counterargument is or you are too lazy or scared to make one.

Your posts are simply self-congratulatory assertions. No argument in sight. No counterarguments, just judgments of other people's arguments.

And the fact that you don't even seem to realize any of this makes me think you are likely scared to interact with ideas and make actual counterarguments.

Cowardly shit. I mean, cowardly shit.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3055
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby Ecmandu » Mon Jun 22, 2020 3:56 pm

We don’t have the language in English unless you want to explain thinks awkwardly such as “the birth mother of the birth mother of the birth mother of me” to refer to “the great grand mother of me”... it all sounds cold and clinical and people look at you funny. Trust me, I’ve tried this! Things are not easy in English when you do this. I can just say “mother”. “Mother of what? You or someone else?”

English is a language that has never allowed for the expression of people as not being possessions ... “my mom”. “My child” “my husband”. Etc...

It’s a childish way to see the world and people, exceedingly immature. Our culture is exceedingly immature.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10099
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Mon Jun 22, 2020 4:58 pm

Karpel Tunnel wrote:I'm not childless. I own things not people, not even my child. I have exclusive rights in relation to my child, but that does not mean I own him. (that was one of you implied but not actually written out ideas and it doesn't work).

Oh okay, so if your child is kidnapped, you can't complain about it, since you don't own your child. Interesting. See, this is the "common sense" factor that I mentioned. Most people, most human beings, know that if your child is kidnapped, your property taken, that this is a problem. But since your children are not your property, (they are nobody's?) then you shouldn't have a problem with that?


Karpel Tunnel wrote:Here's what i notice. Instead of actually responding to anything I wrote, you just make statements and assumptions. Try to fucking sell your kid. I can sell everything I own. Everything. I can't sell my kid, legally or morally in relation to society. It's not an ownership issue.

So you have to be able to sell something, otherwise it's not ownership? Very interesting...


Karpel Tunnel wrote:Ownership:
Ownership is the state or fact of exclusive rights and control over property, which may be any asset, including an object, land or real estate, or intellectual property.
Things or ideas. Not people.

So... you don't own yourself? I'm guessing 'No', in theory, but 'Yes', in action.


Karpel Tunnel wrote:Property is what is owned: property is
an object or objects that belong to someone:


People are precisely not objects in modern law.

This is further argumentation that "you don't own yourself". Well, I disagree. I do own myself. Maybe I'm unique. Let's find out, how unique though?

I was under the presumption that most people, do own themselves, are in-control of themselves, are responsible for themselves... seems like I might be wrong?


Karpel Tunnel wrote:I own a doll, I can legally rip it's head off. I cannot do that to my child.
I can sell the doll.

So if you mutilate and sell your child, this proves ownership?? Very interesting, I'm learning so, so much, from this thread. Thank you. You're proving how necessary and insightful this can be. I didn't know that you had to destroy or sell something, otherwise you don't own it?


Karpel Tunnel wrote:People can even buy dolls to have sex with. They can sell that doll for an hour to some other guy to have violent sex with it. They go to prison and even in prison culture get killed if they do that to a child.

Even murderers and rapists know the difference between a doll and a child. The former being an object, the latter not.

I notice this with posters like you. Instead of actually interacting with other people's arguments - you know, doing the work of philosophical or intellectual interaction - you just spout your position, throw in assumptions, and seem to think this is a response. Nice appeal to incredulity in the middle there about mothers not owning their children.

The holes in your ability to think and discuss ideas with other people are glaring. Smugness built on nothing.

I can take a hammer to every single thing I own, by right, in the law. Ownership is a legal term for our relationship to

THINGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OBJECTS AND THE LIKE.

The mother you barf your incredulity around does not have to worry about anyone else owning her child. She and the father have rights, legally in relation to that child. But they are not ownership rights.

You're still a boring ass who can't argue his way out of a paper doily.

Or, actually, perhaps you can. You seem intelligent. But you either don't understand what an argument or counterargument is or you are too lazy or scared to make one.

Your posts are simply self-congratulatory assertions. No argument in sight. No counterarguments, just judgments of other people's arguments.

And the fact that you don't even seem to realize any of this makes me think you are likely scared to interact with ideas and make actual counterarguments.

Cowardly shit. I mean, cowardly shit.

Yikes, these are some giant leaps of logic. Mutilation, selling people, sex, you've introduced a lot into this notion of "Objectification". Maybe that's your intention. People aren't "Objects" (says you), yet humans objectify each-other everyday. What else is claim to ownership and property, except this "Objectification"? That doesn't mean that, somehow, parents are immune, or that you don't act as though you do in-fact 'Own' your own child or body. Maybe, just maybe, you really believe the nonsense and garbage you just spewed. I really don't know, but it's sick and twisted, either way.

Imagine people walking around who ...don't own themselves ...don't own their own children ...have no possession of self. Again, I could be wrong, seems like I am. At least, my perspective is the minority already. I was under the presumption, again, that most people own-themselves and own their own children. As-if an infant, child, or teenager can be picked-up off the street, and anybody can lay-claim or ownership of him/her. "Nobody can own anybody else"? That's not quite true, nor accurate. People have before, in the past, so what changed?

Furthermore, therefore, is it really true, that today nobody owns themselves, or to do so, would be to "Objectify yourself" as you implied? Is this even possible, existentially? How can somebody "Objectify him or herself"?
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2520
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby Ecmandu » Mon Jun 22, 2020 5:09 pm

Urwrong,

The very fact that your child can be kidnapped or you can be killed by another, means, by definition! That you don’t own your child or yourself... ownership as a “god given right” means that these things are impossible! By definition!
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10099
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Mon Jun 22, 2020 5:47 pm

Kidnapping means that a person has stolen the possession of a person.

Again... I thought these were common sense, but it never ceases to amaze me around this forum.
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2520
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby Ecmandu » Mon Jun 22, 2020 5:52 pm

Urwrongx1000 wrote:Kidnapping means that a person has stolen the possession of a person.

Again... I thought these were common sense, but it never ceases to amaze me around this forum.


Again, The English language does not have very sophisticated language for this concept. If you can possibly be killed, does that mean you actually own yourself?

If you can possibly be kidnapped, that doesn’t mean parents own you... it’s the idea, again, that you don’t own yourself.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10099
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby MagsJ » Mon Jun 22, 2020 6:40 pm

Urwrongx1000 wrote:How can a child be "yours" if you don't own him/her?

To be "mine" or "yours", necessarily implies and signifies ownership. You, along with most others here, can try to deny it. But that's not the way people act/think/feel/say. To say something is "yours" or "mine", is to demonstrate and prove ownership. Furthermore, humans are bought and sold, trafficked, traded, etc. Just because these actions are taboo, doesn't mean they're not reality. To take a child, from his/her parent, is to take ownership. Conflating the term with "Guardianship" does little to 'justify' the nature of the relationship.

Well.. ‘parent and therefore legal guardian‘ as opposed to just ‘legal guardian‘, as the latter involves paperwork, bureaucracy, and going through much red-tape.. the former, doesn’t.. unless you want to count the signing of the birth certificate. that is?

Grown people are indeed bought and sold.. are they promised a better life? are they stolen? is it a hoax? do some go willingly, out of desperation for a better life? Could be all of the above, but owning ourselves doesn’t always seem to work for many.

Most human beings, apparently not reflective of this forum, do feel possessive and responsible for their 'own' biological children, and therefore, do Own them, are Owners of them.

Here's the 'taboo'.

Westerners, especially Americans and Liberals, don't like the idea of "owning" people. But the common-sense, Reality, is, that parents 'own' their own children, and people 'own' their own bodies/minds/souls. To suggest otherwise, puts the burden-of-proof upon you, not me. You need to argue and prove your case, convincingly, if you honestly believe "nobody owns anybody, not even their own selves". Because I doubt any human being actually thinks this way, actually believes it, with exception to "God did it". Maybe that's your position too. But it's a weak one.

Have you heard me mention god as true? I thought my position on gods and religion was clear to all here? No?

https://time.com/5042560/libya-slave-trade/ watch the video.. doctored news? fake news? part-fake news?

What of when children are homeless, have no parents, are unwanted, or sneak out to do grown-people things.. as in Rotherham? Is this real? Is this a hoax?

B54663ED-9571-4BA8-8C0A-332F3D51A3FC.jpeg
B54663ED-9571-4BA8-8C0A-332F3D51A3FC.jpeg (129.03 KiB) Viewed 498 times
Last edited by MagsJ on Mon Jun 22, 2020 9:12 pm, edited 3 times in total.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ

I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Wait, What! - MagsJ


Nobilis Est Ira Leonis | Om Surya Devaay namah | Manus justa nardus
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 19933
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …Suryaloka.. the sun

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby MagsJ » Mon Jun 22, 2020 7:19 pm

I shall ask my mother if she thought/felt like she owned me.. I recall she did / I recall I didn’t, but I weren’t put up for sale, stolen, molested etc., but I do recall a disturbing attempt of the unknown kind on my person, right outside my front door, when 9.

Is a sister considered a legal guardian?
No. An older sibling could possibly become a legal guardian of his/her younger siblings, for instance if their parents were incapacitated or died. ... A legal guardian would be someone appointed through the court to care for a child. This could be anyone, not necessarily (and not usually) a sibling.

Family are the custodial-authority, by default.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ

I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Wait, What! - MagsJ


Nobilis Est Ira Leonis | Om Surya Devaay namah | Manus justa nardus
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 19933
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …Suryaloka.. the sun

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby MagsJ » Mon Jun 22, 2020 9:11 pm

D/p
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ

I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Wait, What! - MagsJ


Nobilis Est Ira Leonis | Om Surya Devaay namah | Manus justa nardus
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 19933
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …Suryaloka.. the sun

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:34 pm

Listen... when you say something or somebody is "yours" or "mine" ...these words mean Ownership.

You can deny it all you want. And this thread is proof of the denial. It doesn't change the fact, or common sense.

"Yours", "Mine", My Child, all signify Ownership, Property, Possession. You can claim that "humans are subjects and cannot be owned", but it doesn't change the human relationship.


Karpel, when somebody kidnaps your child, then you are distraught and maddened, because it is "your child". Because you own your own child. That's why. That's the reason. That's the cause.

No amount of linguistic jump-roping and hula-hooping is going to get you out of it (Ecmandu), Mr. English-Language-Is-Not-Good-Enough. Yes, it is. It describes and directly signifies, the exact relationship.


If anything, human beings, and animals too, are most possessive of their progeny, and "own body", than anything else. It is most paramount, not least, as you all have tried in vain to counter-argue.
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2520
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby phyllo » Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:41 pm

I own my parents. :lol:
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11902
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby Fixed Cross » Tue Jun 23, 2020 4:37 pm

So what is the alternative, in case of children - their parents do not have responsibility for them, no right to compel them to say, stay in the house at night...

the idea is that a parent has responsibility for and some command over a child as long as the child is not capable of taking care of itself.

Its a rule based on pragmatism rather than deep moral contemplation. But I don't think any law says that children are literally property of their parents.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10551
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby Meno_ » Tue Jun 23, 2020 5:45 pm

Fixed Cross wrote:So what is the alternative, in case of children - their parents do not have responsibility for them, no right to compel them to say, stay in the house at night...

the idea is that a parent has responsibility for and some command over a child as long as the child is not capable of taking care of itself.

Its a rule based on pragmatism rather than deep moral contemplation. But I don't think any law says that children are literally property of their parents.



I agree in partial approbation of responsibility as the child grows older, they a say.e more responsibility for their actions, as expected from them, except in cases where their growth does not align with their development.

Then, the causes for this need to be looked at, from increasingly deeper levels. And this.procedure of analysis can come to a block, bolted by a dead lock, which primarily can appear as impenetrable iron clad.
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6696
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby MagsJ » Wed Jun 24, 2020 1:58 am

phyllo wrote:I own my parents. :lol:

Same :D

They did my bidding.. not vice versa.

Urwrongx1000 wrote:Listen... when you say something or somebody is "yours" or "mine" ...these words mean Ownership.

You’re talking about a symbiotic relationship here, but most aren’t like that.. most don’t give a fuck, and so I think I, and some, are past caring.

You can deny it all you want. And this thread is proof of the denial. It doesn't change the fact, or common sense.

I’m not in denial, I just prefer the term ‘belonging’ to ‘owning’. We own what we buy.. we didn’t buy our partner or our child.. we attracted the former and then made the latter.

"Yours", "Mine", My Child, all signify Ownership, Property, Possession. You can claim that "humans are subjects and cannot be owned", but it doesn't change the human relationship.

..that of belonging? ; )

If anything, human beings, and animals too, are most possessive of their progeny, and "own body", than anything else. It is most paramount, not least, as you all have tried in vain to counter-argue.

I’m most possessive of my mind/my brain.. it Lords itself over me, and so I take control, of It.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ

I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Wait, What! - MagsJ


Nobilis Est Ira Leonis | Om Surya Devaay namah | Manus justa nardus
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 19933
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …Suryaloka.. the sun

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby Ecmandu » Wed Jun 24, 2020 2:27 am

Ok, we’re talking about family so far.

What about, “my friend”?

Do you own “your” friend? Are they “your” property?
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10099
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby Fixed Cross » Wed Jun 24, 2020 3:40 am

I suppose one needs to be able to own up to life to own oneself - owning oneself means being independent. Resourcefulness is required, fullness of resource. Spartans tried to give children quick self-ownership by literally throwing them to the wolves. One either owns oneself or doesn't exist.

Perhaps also, the drive to own other people.
Can one own oneself if one owns part of another?

If not, most would perhaps rather relinquish self-ownership.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Arch-Native Philosophy - Sumerian Bill and Ted - The Magical Tree of Life Academy
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 10551
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Wed Jun 24, 2020 5:52 am

People generally are neither self-critical nor self-aware. People have an intrinsic, innate, "natural", sense-of-self and autonomy. This is why it makes sense to say such things as "my food", "my teddy bear", "my friend", "my house", etc. Possession is a very powerful and profound concept. It signifies Authority, most of which goes unspoken. People have a sixth-sense when it comes to Authority, Ownership, Responsibility, and Assets. People try to be 'respectful' to each-other, but, freedom and liberty are trampled all the time, everyday. Everybody steps on everybody's toes. Everybody breathes each-other's air. There's not enough for everybody, not enough to go around. This produces conflict, competition, and fighting. A shared claim: "this is mine -- No! it's mine!" results in conflict. When a child is kidnapped, it is because the child is possessed/owned/guarded, whatever you want to call it, by the parents, and especially the mother. A child is a bodily-extension of the mother.

The fact that most of you can sit here, deny it, pretend it doesn't exist, or discount it, speaks to the truth of the matter. It runs deeper than most care to admit.


In response to Fixed Cross, Self-Ownership comes first. You cannot "own another", or anything, without first owning some small aspect of 'Self'. This is the root of Ego, "I", "You", identity, itself.

Do you own your own memories??? Let that sink in. How philosophical do you want to get? How philosophical can you get?


The term "throw em to the wolves" literally comes from Sparta and Greece, yes indeed.

You need to "own-yourself" before you can ever hope to own anything else. Maybe, most people don't? Most people do not own-themselves, but are instead, owned by others? Consider that option. The State? God? The Heavenly Father? Call it what you will.
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2520
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby Prismatic567 » Wed Jun 24, 2020 8:35 am

Urwrongx1000 wrote:A mother and father "own" their biological child, who is 3-years-old. The child is the property of the parents. The child is owned.

There are various meanings to the term 'own'.

    1. belonging to oneself or itself —usually used following a possessive case or possessive adjective.

    2. used to express immediate or direct kinship

    3. to have or hold as property : POSSESS

    4. to acknowledge to be true, valid, or as claimed : ADMIT
    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/own

Thus 'the child is owned by his parents' denote 2. immediate or direct kinship.
Meaning 3 i.e. hold as property is not applicable to parents and their children.

Inductively justified, it is intrinsic within human nature that human parents has the moral obligation to exercise parental care over their children till they are mature to go on their own. This is also very evident with all the 'higher' animals.


So why is it morally acceptable, "right", and "common" for this type of ownership, but not the ownership of "adults", or one race of another race?

You cannot equivocate the two different meaning of the term 'own' in this case.
What is morally wrong with 'ownership' of another human is related to meaning 3, i.e. to own another human as a chattel that can be traded financially or otherwise,
or own to serves as a means to one's end.
All humans has the right to basic human dignity, thus are only ends to themselves and not as mean to the end of others.
The Golden Rule & other universal moral rules within all normal humans applies here.

Furthermore, if the child grows and is 33-years-old, does the parent no longer "own" the child? Is he/she no longer "the property" of the parents?

You cannot conflate meaning 2 with meaning 3 as in the above.

Once the child is matured to go on his own, the parent do not have the moral obligation to be responsible for the child's survival. However the parents can use their discretion of there is need to take care of the child, subject to their state of empathy and compassion.
I am a progressive human being, a World Citizen, NOT-a-theist and not religious.
Prismatic567
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2802
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 4:35 am

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:51 am

Prismatic567 wrote:Once the child is matured to go on his own, the parent do not have the moral obligation to be responsible for the child's survival.

As-if children turn 18-years-old and the parent doesn't love or feel possession of them anymore???

What. The. Fuck???

This is a strange forum. How can you and others imply such things???
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2520
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby MagsJ » Wed Jun 24, 2020 1:32 pm

Perhaps in claiming ‘ownership’ of our children and kin and kind, the concept can open up and allow for (and often is.. as we know) kin to take advantage of their kin and kind.. as seen in the selling off of one’s children, kin, and own un-related kind, into servitude, prostitution, and slavery etc.. and let’s not forget physical, mental, and sexual abuse, of the above aforementioned groups.

A birth certificate is proof of Parent/s, and as a legal document does not contain the word ‘own’ ..it does however acknowledge that that child belongs to those Parent(s), and also prohibits the likelihood of anyone claiming your child(ren) as theirs’.

I’m not against you, @Urwrong, in using the word ‘own’, but I think the World is wary of its connotations and therefore it’s implementations and legitimacy for crime and criminal activities.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ

I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Wait, What! - MagsJ


Nobilis Est Ira Leonis | Om Surya Devaay namah | Manus justa nardus
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 19933
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …Suryaloka.. the sun

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sat Jun 27, 2020 1:35 am

I think the author of the thread should define the word "own".

However, since I believe such a thing will never happen, considering the difficulty of the task, I suggest rephrasing the question posed in the original post.

The question posed in the original post is:

Urwrong wrote:A mother and father "own" their biological child, who is 3-years-old. The child is the property of the parents. The child is owned.

So why is it morally acceptable, "right", and "common" for this type of ownership, but not the ownership of "adults", or one race of another race?


One can restate in the following manner:

Why is it undesirable for adults to interact with other adults the same way that parents interact with children?

Why is it not fine for some adults (e.g. black people) to be treated like children by other adults (e.g. white people)?


There you go. The word "own" has vanished.
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4434
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby perpetualburn » Sat Jun 27, 2020 3:43 am

Urwrongx1000 wrote:Possession is a very powerful and profound concept. It signifies Authority, most of which goes unspoken.


Indeed, as Shakespeare says in what might be the most powerful four lines in all of poetry:

"So between them love did shine
That the Turtle saw his right
Flaming in the Phoenix' sight:
Either was the other's mine."

But it's a mutual possession... And I'll go further and say unless you feel so "possessed," so positively enslaved you can never be free. This type of "slavery" needs to be distinguished from the negative type of slavery... like as in owning actual slaves... The feeling of possession for slaves will never be as profound as the feeling of "possession" between two people in love... Additionally, the slave can be discarded and replaced. It's an economic unit that helps bring you profit (like modern wage slaves do to giant corporations)...You can't discard the person you're in love with ...it would be like trying to untie the knot of fate (the harder you try, the tighter its hold on you gets)...Nor can you assign him or her a specific value, his/her value is limitless/infinite...Does this mean that true valuing starts with valuing someone whose value is limitless, but I digress...

Now this brings up an interesting question... Could the slave owner ever love his slave to the point that he elevates him up to a place of honor and dignity like real lovers do?
As a pillar of rising smoke did my angel condescend and appear, standing without reserve on the exhausted banks of infinite sorrow.

http://knowthyself.forumotion.net/f6-agora
perpetualburn
 
Posts: 160
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 3:57 am

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby Ecmandu » Sat Jun 27, 2020 4:11 am

Mutual love to that regard is a zero sum game. 2 winners, 8 billion losers. It’s uneightened people that throw out apologetics for mutual ownership, on every level. Just two psychopaths who don’t give a shit about life on earth ... but have waited their whole lives for the excuse of mutual ownership and to make it sound like the best thing in all of earth.

I love people. People love me. I have no illusions that this is something to celebrate or dignify. I mourn it everyday. But then again, I’m not a sociopath. I’m not always as skilled as I’d like to be, but let’s be realistic, the level of skill required to talk to billions of sociopaths has to be extremely damn high. They’re always sociopathing on you, ceaselessly, relentlessly.

Navigating that is extremely difficult.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10099
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Why is it Okay and Morally Justified to Own other people

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Sat Jun 27, 2020 12:45 pm

You make a good point, but ultimately fail.

Yes, love/ownership is Exclusivity. It is the bond between Two, to the detriment and exclusion of Several Billion. Thus it is dangerous to 'Own' others, to form intimate bonds, or further, to bear the progeny of such bonds, which is the relationship between Mother and Child. The fact that, on this forum, common sense is denied, and "you don't own your own body", is very telling as to the casual, average psyche, this representing a microcosm to the macrocosm. Do average people, also, not own themselves, and not own their own children? Maybe not. In that case, maybe you have a point, Ecmandu. However, I personally believe that people lie, often. People say one thing, but think a second, and act a third. So you say you have "love for humanity", but I doubt it.

Ownership is primal and primary. Animals have it. It is instinct. Just as you 'Own' the food you eat and swallow, so too do you 'Own' your body, so too do you 'Own' your progeny, which is direct, biological, genetic extension of self.


Continue with your Denials. This has been a very, very informative thread thus far. Let's keep it going.
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2520
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users