Ownership, in many cases in Humanity is connected closely to Pride. He who ownes, not necessary a material possession, but a sense of purpose, has something no one else has. Plato stated that owning objects is detrimental to a person’s character. There are many ways that people use ownership to corrupt youth today. Countless youth today now receive countless gifts from their parents. Gifts that are often times thrown away after the kid loses interest in it, or he get’s another toy. What character does this reflect as Plato stated? Parent’s that give their children ownerships show the spoiled and selfish heart of the whole family. A heart that shows wealth, power, and pride. Their child is the offspring of pride itself. In the Gospel of Luke in this rich family’s dusty Bible tells what will happen to them in sixteenth chapter, verses twenty two thru twenty four, “22 And it came to pass, that the beggar[Lazarus] died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; 23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. 24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.” It’s pretty clear to what the Christian God has to say about them being rich and selfish.
Now Aristotle claims that ownership of tangible goods can helps to developed moral character. A young man on a farm, lives a humble, moral life. He has to work hard to make his way for his family. He is given money(often the source of greed/pride) for that hard work and uses that possession to support his love ones. This shows that his heart is moral, loving, and humble. In this event it shows how by having a ownership of little it can be used to support and serve others. What is to be made of this? In both cases a boy is given a possession. One is thrown away, the other is given away, and thus both are gone in the end. However the effect of each differs drastically. One is tossed out without a care in the world, the other given away with the heaviest of hearts, and poorest of circumstances. In John-Paul Sartre’s view the proposes that ownership extends beyond objects to include intangible things as well. In the last story the country boy had a possession that the other did not have. He had love. He became proficient and earned money and used his possession to supported his family. His true possession was love. Love for his family, love for his life.
Although some possessions can be detrimental to a person’s well being. It can make someone’s very prideful and selfish. Unless someone from the outside controls what he receives, he will become basically a spoiled brat. Even in the Holy Bible that so many Americans rely on as their way to judge people gives light to this. The New Testament book of Mark chapter ten, verses nineteen thru twenty two we read, “19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother. 20 And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth. 21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me. 22 And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.” To the contrast, someone who works for everything they own, who’s going to be the better person? The one who works, or the one that goes gimme?
Now Aristotle claims that ownership of tangible goods can helps to developed moral character. A young man on a farm, lives a humble, moral life. He has to work hard to make his way for his family. He is given money(often the source of greed/pride) for that hard work and uses that possession to support his love ones. This shows that his heart is moral, loving, and humble. In this event it shows how by having a ownership of little it can be used to support and serve others. What is to be made of this? In both cases a boy is given a possession. One is thrown away, the other is given away, and thus both are gone in the end. However the effect of each differs drastically. One is tossed out without a care in the world, the other given away with the heaviest of hearts, and poorest of circumstances. In John-Paul Sartre’s view the proposes that ownership extends beyond objects to include intangible things as well. In the last story the country boy had a possession that the other did not have. He had love. He became proficient and earned money and used his possession to supported his family. His true possession was love. Love for his family, love for his life.
Although some possessions can be detrimental to a person’s well being. It can make someone’s very prideful and selfish. Unless someone from the outside controls what he receives, he will become basically a spoiled brat. Even in the Holy Bible that so many Americans rely on as their way to judge people gives light to this. The New Testament book of Mark chapter ten, verses nineteen thru twenty two we read, “19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother. 20 And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth. 21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me. 22 And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.” To the contrast, someone who works for everything they own, who’s going to be the better person? The one who works, or the one that goes gimme?