Separation of possession: benefits.

[Dr. D]

On my way home tonight, I saw a truck on the side of the road. This truck was parked at a cross that was placed on the side of the road for a person who I graduated with who died about a year ago in a crash at that spot. I believe it was Edgar Luna's family that was grieving for his death.

One thing I've been thinking about lately is what possession means. Do I really own this person? Mom is my mom but what else is she to other people? I no longer think a girlfriend would be mine alone, as I think that can be selfish. Then the same could be said from the other end, there must be benefits aside from 'denial of self' that allows one to feel generally more content through the separation of possession.

I thought about a mom and dad losing their son. What if the family was not the only one to lose their son? What if they viewed their while tribe as the parents? What if the whole group of 150 or so people saw Edgar as their son? Would that relieve some of the pain off the two people that he called Mom and Dad? I think so. Did that lessen their relationship overall? Not one bit, they still got to share in his whole life.

This lack of ownership has many benefits and I want us to all name some so we can learn. I personally believe that early humans lived without ownership and possession came about with agriculture. You don't have to agree with me but I still think there are many benefits to lack of ownership. Let's talk about them.

Also, feel free to share negatives: being taking advantage of is one that I can think of.

[Iguana]

I guess that in an ideal society of raw paleo dieters there would be only benefits … For example, there would be ample space for parking cars in every city, no matter how huge and crowded it is. A few cars standing here and there with unlocked doors and ignition key left on the switch would be available to anybody who needs one… At swimming pools, we could leave our clothes at the cloakroom without using any locker: somebody else could dress and leave wearing "ours", no problems: we would take ourselves other clothes when leaving.

I guess half or more of the working people work only to ensure the proper function of private ownerships. Lawyers, notaries, accountants, banks and insurances employees, cashiers, salesmen, secretaries, politicians, policemen, locksmiths, etc. could enjoy perpetual vacations or help the blue collars in their useful (work) - fun - amusement.

 

[Aura]

I thought about a mom and dad losing their son. What if the family was not the only one to lose their son? What if they viewed their while tribe as the parents? What if the whole group of 150 or so people saw Edgar as their son? Would that relieve some of the pain off the two people that he called Mom and Dad? I think so. Did that lessen their relationship overall? Not one bit, they still got to share in his whole life.
I personally believe that early humans lived without ownership and possession came about with agriculture.

Totally agree.

[bookittyrun]

the only thing i've ever owned was the crap i took this morning.

and i flushed it immediately.

 



live selfless, without attachments.  it opens all the doors of possibility, not just your own.

[Dr. D]

It really sounds like a pleasant world, Iguana. Sadly most wouldn't go for it because it means giving up most of what they hold dear: their ferrari, big home, fancy clothes, the only things in their mind that makes them unique, which is of course the most important thing on planet earth to be, unique. /sarcasm.

Possession is 9/10s of the law. The rest of it is things that harm others, regardless of possession. One example would be DUI. Or arson.

[Aura]

I guess that in an ideal society of raw paleo dieters there would be only benefits … For example, there would be ample space for parking cars in every city, no matter how huge and crowded it is. A few cars standing here and there with unlocked doors and ignition key left on the switch would be available to anybody who needs one… At swimming pools, we could leave our clothes at the cloakroom without using any locker: somebody else could dress and leave wearing "ours", no problems: we would take ourselves other clothes when leaving.

Hi Iguana, sorry but I am struggling to picture out how a neolithic society made of paleo eaters using goods that are a clear product of the neolithic industry could be much better than the society we have now.
I mean, the main point is not what you eat but how your mind works and what your desires are.

As long as there will be "fake" (industrial) stuff around, we wont be able to let go on nothing.
Because those goods were conceived by a desire for "more", for "better" than nature created...
It is its mark.
Does not matter what we eat. Our minds and behaviours and patterns and habits are heavily affected by domestication, civilization. Deeply Neolithic.

I d suggest we better start to change our minds first and then the food.. 

[Aura]

An interesting excerpt from

"The Consequences of Domestication and Sedentism"
by Emily A. Schultz & Robert H. Lavenda

"Our Land"

Sedentism and domestication represent not just a technological change but also a change in worldview. Land was no longer a free good, available to anyone, with resources scattered randomly across the landscape; it was transformed into particular territories, collectively or individually owned, on which people raised crops and flocks.  Thus, sedentism and a high level of resource extraction (whether by complex foraging or farming) led to concepts of property that were rare in previous foraging societies. Graves, grave goods, permanent housing, grain-processing equipment, as well as the fields and herds, connected people to places.  The human mark on the environment was larger and more obvious following sedentization and the rise of farming; people transformed the landscape in more dramatic ways--building terraces or walls to hold back floods.

Read the entire article http://www.primitivism.com/sedentism.htm

[Iguana]

 

Hi Iguana, sorry but I am struggling to picture out how a neolithic society made of paleo eaters using goods that are a clear product of the neolithic industry could be much better than the society we have now.
 

I agree that it couldn’t be. I was teasing to show that it is completely utopian… 

… unless all the technological goods could be made free of any human labor by a totally robotized industry on the moon of a planet very similar to Earth, but virgin! 

As for changing our mind before changing our food, I think it goes the other way around. There are opioids in milk and cereal grains, caffeine and alcohol are drugs too. Sexual drives are seriously disturbed by these foods.

Moreover, your above quote plainly shows that sedentism, agriculture and domestication deeply change the structure and organization of society, thus people's behavior and way of thinking. The article seems to be another cornerstone for our castle. I'll read tomorrow, it's late here...

[sabertooth]

We are just visitors in this world, as spiritual beings that are encased in a flesh suit. How is it possible to possess anything. Our physical bodies nevertheless appear to be possessions of an energy being that claims to be the right full owner of the body, seated at the throne of consciousness, but it is only a temporary occupant of the temple. When the suit gets worn out or tore up the occupant vanishes without a trace..

The Gods must be crazy is highly recommended. If you haven't watched it at least watch the first part, it explains very clearly the evils of possession.
The Gods Must be Crazy

[Dr. D]

The Gods Must be Crazy is a hilarious movie. "Are the voices in my head distracting you?"