Total Posts:7|Showing Posts:1-7
Jump to topic:

The Great Question

000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 9:07:54 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
This is something I used in a recent debate:

If 50 people got together with 50 pieces of their own personal 100 ft x 100 ft planks of wood, and then nailed it all together to form a home to house them all, can one simply decide he dislikes living with them and rip out his plank of wood, freezing the entire house with no way to fix the hole? (as those 50 were the only planks of wood in the world)

*This is obviously a secession question, so lets not get too caught up in the technicalities of the analogy.


That said, I would think that the person may definitely leave the house, no question there, but he doesn't have a right to reclaim his plank since he relinquished individual ownership of it. Ownership given to something/someone else that is not yourself, and there is no specified date of its return or explicit declaration that it must eventually be returned, is by default the property of the thing you gave it to until both the receiving and giving party are in consensus about returning the object.

Thoughts?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 9:12:30 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I agree--provided there was an explicit agreement among them, even if it was verbal.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 9:17:52 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
It all depends on the terms of the agreement.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 9:21:36 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/17/2011 9:17:52 AM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
It all depends on the terms of the agreement.

The terms were that they would form a unified single house and give up individual ownership of each plank to a joint ownership of the house. There is no mention of a date when the house agreement dissolves and there is no talk of it eventually having to dissolve if one person does not like it (just like the constitution).

So what is the default option?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 9:23:59 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
It seems you forgot to mention that only a few people were allowed to decide to nail everyone else's wood together.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 9:29:49 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/17/2011 9:23:59 AM, socialpinko wrote:
It seems you forgot to mention that only a few people were allowed to decide to nail everyone else's wood together.

With consent of the governed, so moot point. New York's, New Jersey's, Virginia's etc. governors did not individually decide to join America.

"Resolved, as the sense of the legislature, that the said report, with the said resolutions and letter accompanying the same, be submitted to a Convention of delegates to be chosen by the people of this state..." (NY Ratification Document.http://www.constitution.org...)
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 9:33:16 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/17/2011 9:29:49 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/17/2011 9:23:59 AM, socialpinko wrote:
It seems you forgot to mention that only a few people were allowed to decide to nail everyone else's wood together.

With consent of the governed, so moot point. New York's, New Jersey's, Virginia's etc. governors did not individually decide to join America.

"Resolved, as the sense of the legislature, that the said report, with the said resolutions and letter accompanying the same, be submitted to a Convention of delegates to be chosen by the people of this state..." (NY Ratification Document.http://www.constitution.org...)

Chosen meaning voted. Well I guess you got me there, it's not like most of the population were legally prohibited from choosing....... oh wait of course! Blacks, women, and any white man who doesn't own property aren't actually people at all and so it's totally legitimate to decide that their property is now controlled by a government, "chosen by the people". Silly me.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.