NonE's call about self-ownership
Current time: 10-17-2017, 06:20 AM
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
Author: Dionysus
Last Post: NonEntity
Replies: 254
Views: 161940

Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
NonE's call about self-ownership
11-01-2011, 02:08 PM (This post was last modified: 11-01-2011 02:12 PM by Dionysus.)
Post: #52
RE: NonE's call about self-ownership
So, the more I cogitate on this self-ownership dealie, the more I become convinced that there are some things that simply defy lending themselves to the ”ownership” concept. What exactly is meant by “I” and “me” in the declaration: “I own me”? If it’s the physical body, then yes, an argument can be made that I don’t necessarily own “myself.” In fact, the “state” basically comes right out and claims it “owns you” lock, stock and barrel. It robs you of your labor via taxes and inflation. It makes you get permission to engage in peaceful economic activity. It abducts you (or worse) if you behave (even peacefully) in a way it doesn’t approve of. At length, it considers you to be nothing more than a milk cow (and even a beef cow if it has to). It’s hard to argue that the state doesn’t have at least some degree of ownership over you— that is, the physical body you. But what if there is more to “you” than your physical body? Yes, I’m talking about things like spirit, soul, consciousness, etc.-- the noncorporeal, nonphysical, ineffable, eternal “you.” Could it be that ownership only applies to the material world? I know-- this raises the whole dreaded “intellectual property” issue. I personally don’t believe IP is a valid form of property, but the issue hasn’t really been settled (and may never be), and I don’t want to waste time debating it here. I’m just throwing it out there that if we really are more than our physical bodies, it’s nonsensical to even talk about the “more than” part of us being “owned.” How would such ownership be manifested or demonstrated to anyone’s satisfaction? I’m reminded of a Three Stooges episode where Curly exclaimed, “I’m not me!!!” (to which Moe replied in typical smart-ass fashion, “’I’m not me’… nice grammar.” Smile So, that’s it then. Going forward, that will be my “final solution” to the “self-ownership” conundrum. Yes, I may not “own myself,” but that’s okay, ‘cause I’m not me!!! Thanks, Curly-- you’re a flippin’ genius! Big Grin

P.S.— I’m sure the materialists out there will say this is a bunch of hooey. To that, I respond: Go ahead.. make my day. Tounge
P.P.S.— I wish Marc would chime in on this (after all, he kind of started it). I’m sure he’d have some interesting things to add.

He's noble enough to know what's right
But weak enough not to choose it
He's wise enough to win the world
But fool enough to lose it
He's a New World man - Rush
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
RE: NonE's call about self-ownership - Kel - 10-29-2011, 07:23 PM
RE: NonE's call about self-ownership - Kel - 10-29-2011, 09:03 PM
RE: NonE's call about self-ownership - Kel - 10-29-2011, 10:09 PM
RE: NonE's call about self-ownership - Kel - 10-29-2011, 10:48 PM
RE: NonE's call about self-ownership - Kel - 10-30-2011, 02:00 PM
RE: NonE's call about self-ownership - Jonathanr - 10-30-2011, 08:09 PM
RE: NonE's call about self-ownership - Dionysus - 11-01-2011 02:08 PM
RE: NonE's call about self-ownership - soveREIGN - 11-01-2011, 04:51 PM
RE: NonE's call about self-ownership - Kel - 11-08-2011, 08:42 PM
RE: NonE's call about self-ownership - Jonathanr - 11-20-2011, 04:34 AM
RE: Celebrate...celebrate... - eye2i2hear - 10-01-2012, 02:15 PM

Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)