Lockean property rights

In this debate I will argue for the existence of objective, reality based (natural) property rights based on work/production. This is also known as the Lockean theory of property, after John Locke who first formulated it more than 300 years ago. I will divide ownership into two sub-concepts: attribution and control. In the first section I will show that attribution stems from life itself as a biological process, and in the second section I will argue that for humans in particular ownership also implies the right to control that which can be attributed to you. Claim one, attribution: "I built this house, therefore it is MY creation." Claim two, control: "It is MY house, therefore I have a souvereign right to control it so long as I am peaceful and respect others." (1) Attribution ownership through work Definition: An object is a thing which maintains its cohesion over time. It has well-defioned identity and it remains that way over time. A rock is a typical object. Definition: A process is a collection of objects that continuously expend energy and constituent objects. Thus, it does not have a well-defined identity in the same way as objects. Clouds and rivers are processes, and not objects. Life itself too is a process: every 7 years every single atom in our bodies is replaced with new ones. We are constantly expending energy and changing our constituents. Yet somehow it seems that life behaves like an object too: it has ha well-defined boundary (the cell wall in cells, the skin in multicellular organisms) and it maintains its identity that defines it over time. This curious nature of life as semi-object is due to the fact that the processes that make up a living being are of such a nature that they continuously produce and regenerate the structure of the organism that is needed to produce the organism. Its identity is a self-producing, self-defining, self-sustaining process. Thus, a living being is defined by its self-production. Work is needed to define an organism as itself. They exist only because they are self-creating. Hence, attribution of existents result from the biological process of production. Everything of a biological nature that exists is entirely due to work. Hence a dog exists because the dog produces itself. Hence we can attribute the existence of that dog to itself. In general this gives rise to the concept of self-ownership. Organisms own themselves because they are self-producing. (And by "own" in this sense I mean that you cannot attribute the dog as part of an elephant, because the elephant did not produce the dog. Attribution in this sense means "credit." The dog can take credit for its own existence because it created itself.) (2) control ownership through work in humans Definition: sociality = peaceful coexistence. The defining feature of social animals (ants, bees, elephants, humans) is that they live peacefully together. They respect each others' boundaries -- boundaries that, as we have seen, are self-produced by the individual. It is thus the individual through work that defines the boundaries of its existence. Definition: peace = non-violence = to respect another beings right to control his own life. Each species has their own unique way of living according to their natures. Often this involves violence towards other beings. It is the leopard's nature to be violent towards antelope and eat them. Thus, the relationship between leopards and antelopes is not social. This is the defining feature of leopards and if they did not behave this way then they would cease to exist. Some animals, however, are (largely) social towards their own kind. (in some cases interspecies relationships can be social too) These are typically very productive individuals. Ants for instance are renowned for their ability to perform heavy duty work and produce impressive nests. Cows are walking factories that are able to transform cellulose in their many stomachs into edible calories. As highly productive beings they do not need to be violent towards each other in order to thrive. Therefore they have through natural selection acquired a peaceful nature. They live in peace together and participate in mutual protection from external dangers. They do this because it is in their mutual self-interest to do so, and this furthers their existence. Thus, it is a defining feature of their biology that they are productive and peaceful towards other productive members of the flock. We humans are also a social species. In fact, we are the most social species on earth because we are so productive. Due to our superior intelligence and ability to abstract and reason we have been able to extend our bodies to also include things that are not metabolically part of our bodies. We produce tools, clothes, houses, space rockets and skyscrapers. These are attributable to the individual creators and since we are by nature a social species we respect those attributions. Thus, if I made a house (or bought it with money that I worked for) it is MY house and it is therefore left in peace by the other social members of humanity. I can do with it whatever I want so long as I am peaceful towards others. To summarize, my argument is therefore as follows: - Living beings obtain their existence through work. Therefore work is the key to attribution of existence. ("I built that house, so it's MY creation.") - Some species are social and therefore by nature respect the attributes of their species/tribe members. They live peacefully together. - We humans are such a social, rational species, and it is therefore in our nature to respect the products of the other members of society, including their property. Respect in this sense means allowing them to live in peace and do with their own property as they like so long as they use it in a mutually peaceful manner. This is the biological basis for objective property rights based on labor (Lockean property rights).