Re:What America looked like before the EPA, in photos
by circlefavshape on Friday March 16, 2018 @06:46AM
(#16599777)
Animals have territories too (some collective, some individual), and defend them. I expect our notions of 'property rights' evolved from that
Re:What America looked like before the EPA, in photos
by zaarn on Friday March 16, 2018 @06:49AM
(#16599781)
Maybe, yes, but it doesn't make property right an inherent part of nature, merely a rather popular tactic for higher-evolved animes (I don't see mold taking territories, it grows where it grows and doesn't have any intelligence to defend it or see it as it's own).
Re:What America looked like before the EPA, in photos
by circlefavshape on Tuesday March 20, 2018 @11:42AM
(#16629523)
I'm not arguing the case for property rights, merely pointing out they have a precedent in the natural world
Re:What America looked like before the EPA, in photos
by golergka on Friday March 16, 2018 @06:29AM
(#16599718)
> Property Rights aren't an inherent part of nature just because humans like to be greedy.
Property rights are the first level of abstraction above the physical layer of "might is right". "Public" land is usually a higher level of abstraction, because it almost always still limits who is the public: even indigenous people usually mean "public" land as land of our tribe, not their tribe.
Re:What America looked like before the EPA, in photos
by zaarn on Friday March 16, 2018 @06:43AM
(#16599765)
While I agree, that isn't what I adressed in the argument.
Property rights are still not an inherent part of nature.
If you break down the universe into component parts and sift through it all, you won't find any part that says "Property rights" and rather stuff like "Gravity" or "Particle Weak Interaction" or "Wave-Particle Duality".
Property Rights exist, at best, as part of a human narrative that we have some interest in designating a legal owner for a piece of dirt. Without humans, the dirt is not owned. With humans, we say we own the dirt (but there is no actual, objective ownership).
>People like yourself, who don't see a value in others property
I don't think GP made that point, rather that until Humans come along, no ownership, ie, public ownership, is the default. The land is owned by nobody until someone buys it.
This can be shown with an example; Mars. Who, at this current moment, owns mars? All the dirt on mars must, by your argument, be owned by someone.