You 're welcome to your likes, BB !

And, I understand this thread to be about ' ownership.' It's a purely
mental thing. One might have millions, and yet not have the least
sense of ownership.

We all here are old enough to know the virtues of ' things ' and
money. You 've extolled them well.

On Jul 29, 4:52 am, BB47 <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jul 28, 12:59 pm, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > " I always found it to be the expression of an attitude of freedom
> > from a dictatorship of "things." "
>
> > Wow, Fran !  I see the mystery of mastery in this expression of yours.
> > Greatly liberating.
>
> You may find it liberating, I don't.  I find a warm shower liberating,
> and it does not dictate me or master me.  I just like it.  I would
> choose to have one.
>
> I like things.  If you look at a thing like a tool, what is not to
> like?
> I don't like being without tools.  I am not interested in fancy
> clothes or jewelery at all, but I do like my tools.  Men call them
> "toys" sometimes.  I like those too.  I have a few.  They are still
> tools to me.
>
> Being poor sucks if you ask me.  I tried it ,  didn't care for it.  I
> am certainly not rich though.  I would be willing to give it a go!  I
> know:  I can't buy happiness.  But you can do lots of wonderful
> things.  You can eat better, sleep better (or at least in more
> comfort)  travel easier
> and so much more!  Yes, there are problems.   Overall?  I will take
> the things, thank you.
>
>
>
>
>
> > The freedom you speak of is an attainment. However, untill it happens,
> > as a clear realisation and principle feature in our value - system, we
> > are allowed to see our value in " things," to indulge in and be
> > dictated by them. The latter is the first cause of most of our
> > problems, historical and existential, but it pre - exists and pre -
> > dominates, and makes our socio - politico - economic world go around.
>
> > Yes, who would believe, our worldly order is found on an absence ...
> > of the " attitude of freedom from a dictatorship of "things." !"
>
> > On Jul 28, 10:02 pm, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > In the course of the recent discussion here concerning the reposting
> > > of Minds Eye contributions in other internet fora, the question of
> > > copyright arose. It got me to thinking about the idea of intellectual
> > > ownership and the idea of possession in general.
>
> > > We have all seen the Westerns in which the Native Americans sold away
> > > title to land for nothing, or pittances because the white man's
> > > concept of "owning" land was incomprehensible to them. Throughout
> > > history, many of those whom we regard as great thinkers have been very
> > > critical of the benefits of possessions and owning things. Indeed, a
> > > controversy centred on the absolute poverty of Christ raged throughout
> > > the medieval Christian Church and completely split the Franciscan
> > > movement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> > > Franciscans#Renewed_controversy_on_the_question_of_poverty). In this
> > > context, it is perhaps interesting to note that one of the all-time
> > > heroes here on Minds Eye, William of Occam, was a proponent of the
> > > principle of absolute poverty and lost his job as English Franciscan
> > > provincial and was excommunicated as a result.
>
> > > Personally I spent almost a decade as a Dominican friar, during which
> > > time I took a "vow of poverty." I don't want to go into a discussion
> > > on the extent to which Catholic monks actually live according to this
> > > vow here, personally, I always found it to be the expression of an
> > > attitude of freedom from a dictatorship of "things." It may also have
> > > left an indelible mark on me in that in almost a quarter of a century
> > > since leaving the order I have been pretty bad at earning,
> > > accumulating and retaining material wealth and possessions. During my
> > > life I have gone through a number of pretty radical changes, which
> > > have often involved leaving nearly everything behind and starting
> > > again. Such processes have been, inevitably, traumatic, although not
> > > necessarily negative. One of the things that has helped is the fact
> > > that I have never felt particularly attached to "things". But maybe my
> > > sense of "ownership" is just underdeveloped, or damaged!
>
> > > There's a German saying which states that "he who has possessions has
> > > worries." Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, one of the founders (!) of modern
> > > anarchism went farther with his statement that "property is theft."
> > > What does it mean to "own" something anyway?
>
> > > To use Molly's words: What do you think?
>
> > > Francis- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to