This is interestingly clear as a depiction of the "no one can ever take my stuff" rationalisation lurking under nigh-all flavours of libertarian belief, which turns out to be the same error as beauty-as-material-property.
Nothing is of itself beautiful; beauty is a name given to a type of response experienced by a perceiving mind. Similarly, liberty is not a right or a property; liberty is the agreement of your fellows that you can do that.
(Actual feudalism, at least the Western sort, involved solemnisation of contracts through public oaths before witnesses, and one of the witnesses was God. (Hence the use of saint's relics, bibles, and so on as parts of the oath ritual.) Those individuals undertaking the contracts have context.)
The other obvious gaping pit in the libertarian axioms is that nothing is your own work in any clearly demarcated way. Everything you do rests on the social context you're embedded in, which to a very large extent determines both what's possible for you to do and what's beneficial for you to do.
Woman is pregnant. When does she stop owning her and some random male's creation?
What sort of contract do the couple make with child before conception? The woman owns her egg and the male owns his sperm. What is the transfer of ownership when sperm mets egg?
Does she pop the child and then chuck it out into the world to find a wet nurse. How does the infant make that contract? Interesting.
Maximize? Assumes there are boundaries. Where are those boundaries? End of my fist? Who defines the boundaries? Do we each have to contract with all others the boundaries?
This is interestingly clear as a depiction of the "no one can ever take my stuff" rationalisation lurking under nigh-all flavours of libertarian belief, which turns out to be the same error as beauty-as-material-property.
Nothing is of itself beautiful; beauty is a name given to a type of response experienced by a perceiving mind. Similarly, liberty is not a right or a property; liberty is the agreement of your fellows that you can do that.
(Actual feudalism, at least the Western sort, involved solemnisation of contracts through public oaths before witnesses, and one of the witnesses was God. (Hence the use of saint's relics, bibles, and so on as parts of the oath ritual.) Those individuals undertaking the contracts have context.)
The other obvious gaping pit in the libertarian axioms is that nothing is your own work in any clearly demarcated way. Everything you do rests on the social context you're embedded in, which to a very large extent determines both what's possible for you to do and what's beneficial for you to do.
MMMM? Owning one's self.
Woman is pregnant. When does she stop owning her and some random male's creation?
What sort of contract do the couple make with child before conception? The woman owns her egg and the male owns his sperm. What is the transfer of ownership when sperm mets egg?
Does she pop the child and then chuck it out into the world to find a wet nurse. How does the infant make that contract? Interesting.
This reminds me in passing that Manchester (UK) bought the rights to run their own justice system from the Mosley family in 1846.
Maximize? Assumes there are boundaries. Where are those boundaries? End of my fist? Who defines the boundaries? Do we each have to contract with all others the boundaries?
The pea brain is confused. John is too wordy.