5 ms·

Do animals have social constructs? Because they have dens and territory that they use to survive as well. Property is a pretty universal value.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> they have dens and territory that they use to survive as well A bear's den isn't its property any more than a park bench slept on becomes the slumberer's own. Property, specifically, the system that relates a person to some land via a bundle of use rights, is a deep human construct. It likely goes back to the dawn of agriculture and civilization [1]. [1] https://books.google.com/books?id=f_roIy7ceEsC https://books.google.com/books?id=f_roIy7ceEsC
- yellowapple 4y ago
  > A bear's den isn't its property any more than a park bench slept on becomes the slumberer's own. A bear, however, will use (and indeed seek to monopolize) violence to defend its den. That makes it property, at least until the bear relinquishes its claim (or something - or someone - else challenges its monopoly on violence).
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > bear, however, will use (and indeed seek to monopolize) violence to defend its den. That makes it property That makes it territory. The simplest definition of property might be use rights one doesn’t need to use violence to defend. (Countries don’t have property.)
    - yellowapple 4y ago
      > The simplest definition of property might be use rights one doesn’t need to use violence to defend. For something to be property entails all of: - usus: the right to use it; - fructus: the right to profit or otherwise benefit from it; and - abusus: the right to destroy it, alter it, or otherwise exclude others from it Abusus is in and of itself violence (specifically, theft) unless consented to by all other members of society. By "use rights" you might be thinking of something like usufruct, which is distinct from property and (as you correctly assess) does not necessarily entail violence or the monopolization thereof. > Countries don’t have property. Of course they do: their sovereign territory. It is indeed that property, enforced via a country's / nation-state's monopoly on violence - from which all land ownership derives (hence: that piece of paper called a "deed" that would be useful only as kindling or sanitary napkins if not for the state enforcing it).
pessimizer 4y ago
A bear's den isn't it's property, it's somewhere the bear lives. If a den were a bear's property, the bear would have paperwork.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> they have dens and territory that they use to survive as well A bear's den isn't its property any more than a park bench slept on becomes the slumberer's own. Property, specifically, the system that relates a person to some land via a bundle of use rights, is a deep human construct. It likely goes back to the dawn of agriculture and civilization [1]. [1] https://books.google.com/books?id=f_roIy7ceEsC https://books.google.com/books?id=f_roIy7ceEsC

yellowapple 4y ago
> A bear's den isn't its property any more than a park bench slept on becomes the slumberer's own. A bear, however, will use (and indeed seek to monopolize) violence to defend its den. That makes it property, at least until the bear relinquishes its claim (or something - or someone - else challenges its monopoly on violence).
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > bear, however, will use (and indeed seek to monopolize) violence to defend its den. That makes it property That makes it territory. The simplest definition of property might be use rights one doesn’t need to use violence to defend. (Countries don’t have property.)
  - yellowapple 4y ago
    > The simplest definition of property might be use rights one doesn’t need to use violence to defend. For something to be property entails all of: - usus: the right to use it; - fructus: the right to profit or otherwise benefit from it; and - abusus: the right to destroy it, alter it, or otherwise exclude others from it Abusus is in and of itself violence (specifically, theft) unless consented to by all other members of society. By "use rights" you might be thinking of something like usufruct, which is distinct from property and (as you correctly assess) does not necessarily entail violence or the monopolization thereof. > Countries don’t have property. Of course they do: their sovereign territory. It is indeed that property, enforced via a country's / nation-state's monopoly on violence - from which all land ownership derives (hence: that piece of paper called a "deed" that would be useful only as kindling or sanitary napkins if not for the state enforcing it).

pessimizer 4y ago

A bear's den isn't it's property, it's somewhere the bear lives. If a den were a bear's property, the bear would have paperwork.