Property and Law

This seems to be a typical Property Law Classroom.

Some scholars are asserting, wrongly, that property is a "reified" concept, and therefore invalid. They define "reificiation" as treating an abstract concept as if it is real or concrete, when it is not. Given this definition, it is absolutely clear that property is not a reified concept. In fact, the concrete defintion of property is that an item of property is a thing for me. Moreover, property is also defined as my having control over thing, such that I can say that the thing is in my possession. Once I say that the thing is mine, it is then my property. The idea is that I have the right and the power to prevent others from taking my property, such as the shirt on my back, away from me. Moreover, once I assert that my shirt which is in my closet, when I am out and about, is still my shirt, then property begins to be a meaning or legal concept, starting with the idea of constructive possession of property. Thus, I can assert that the shirt is in my constructive possession, even though it is my closer miles away. Additionally, I can also say that my house is in my constructive possession, even thought I am miles away. Thus, I can begin to say that the property, which is my shirt, is in fact a legal relationship, between persons, and the state, with respect to some thing, tangible or intangible, such as my shirt or patent or copyright. Thus, we can see that, in fact, property is grounded in sense experience and logic, and thus is not reified, and in fact is epistemologically valid. Once we have established that property is valid, we can then see that contracts are valid. You see, if two people possess tangible personal property, such as their extra shirts, they can they trade them with each other in a barter contract. Of course, later on, I will be able to sell my shirt for money, in a contract, as such, and, in any event, we can see that the idea of a contract is epistemologically valid as grounded in concrete property. (C)Perpetual Copyright (2011) by Anthony J. Fejfar, and Anthony J. Faber, and Neothomism, P.C. (PA).