About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread


Post 0

Monday, November 7, 2005 - 8:05amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
ppiness.

Could someone point me to where Rand discusses this? Or, perhaps, where the founding fathers justified this, so long as they don't simply deem these inalienable rights as "self-evident" and/or "God-given".

Also, my room-mate made the comparison of pre-colonial America to the present day oceans. Their was a sort of understanding between the nomadic natives that the land belonged to everybody. It was public property to them. Much like the UN has proclaimed that the oceans are public property to everyone on Earth. If it was okay for us to claim America as our own, is it okay for some entrepreneur to claim the oceans as his own? What would be the difference?

(this led me to the argument with my room-mate that the UN sucks, and the oceans should not be publicly owned...)
(Edited by Brandon Miller
on 11/07, 8:11am)

(Edited by Brandon Miller
on 11/07, 9:24am)

(Edited by Brandon Miller
on 11/07, 9:26am)


Post 1

Monday, November 7, 2005 - 9:51amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"Owned by everybody" is self-contradictory. To own something is to reserve its use from others. If everyone "owns" something whom is its use being reserved from?

The establishment of ownership requires more than just a claim. Locke said mixing one's labor was required. Robert LeFevre extended this to three requirements: claiming, mixing of labor, and specifying the boundary. These three seem necessary and sufficient to me to establish ownership of the previously unowned.

Post 2

Monday, November 7, 2005 - 3:45pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Brandon,

The first part of your post got cut off. (You should edit again.)

I get the general gist of what you are asking, so I will merely point you in a general direction, rather than talk about ownership of oceans and stuff like that at this stage.

Try to buy a copy of Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal. It is not very expensive and it is full of information on the moral bases of ownership, production and distribution. I would suggest you start with two essays at the end, "Man's Rights" and "The Nature of Government," that were added as Appendices (originally from The Virtue of Selfishness).

At this stage of your understanding, you probably will not understand them completely, but after you read the rest of the book, then reread them. They will mean much more.

I would wager that many, many, many of your doubts of this nature will then be cleared up. But then if you have more doubts, you will be able to specify them within a framework.

One comment, though. The primitive idea of ownership comes from staking out something like a piece of land, proclaiming ownership and backing it up with force against encroachers. Some call it starting with a crime, but that is nonsense since you must have a government to have a crime.

Once you get into capitalism (as understood by Objectivism), an ethical base has already been established so that this type of ownership is not enough.

Anyway, that should be an excellent start for you.

Michael



Post to this thread


User ID Password or create a free account.