The Priority of Intellectual Production and Creation in the Hegelian Understanding of Property

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی- پژوهشی

نویسنده

استاد اخلاق اجتماعی، دانشگاه نیوکاسل، انگلستان.

10.22034/jpiut.2025.21099

چکیده

Orthodox readings of Hegels’ expressivist theory of property rights putatively assume he is an apologist for free market capitalism in all spheres of production and distribution. However, greater attention played to his discussion of intellectual property reveals that he is a pluralist about property rights and the particular manifestation of economic distribution and ownership is contingent on structural, economic and technological aspects of a society. The following essays seeks to show that intellectual property rights are an example of pure intentional activity that is best understood as public, social and collective labour when there is an overcoming of rivalrous material limitations. At the end of history, when economic and social conditions allow, private property can be superseded by collective sharing of resources and this is the dynamic nature of sprit, what moves it, the coming out of itself into the world. Recognition for the creator is to be protected and for this reason intellectual labour is both the alpha and omega of property – it is where it begins to where it ends, in the individual being-with the community.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Priority of Intellectual Production and Creation in the Hegelian Understanding of Property

نویسنده [English]

  • David Edward Rose
Professor of Social Ethics, School X Newcastle University, United Kingdom
چکیده [English]

Orthodox readings of Hegels’ expressivist theory of property rights putatively assume he is an apologist for free market capitalism in all spheres of production and distribution. However, greater attention played to his discussion of intellectual property reveals that he is a pluralist about property rights and the particular manifestation of economic distribution and ownership is contingent on structural, economic and technological aspects of a society. The following essays seeks to show that intellectual property rights are an example of pure intentional activity that is best understood as public, social and collective labour when there is an overcoming of rivalrous material limitations. At the end of history, when economic and social conditions allow, private property can be superseded by collective sharing of resources and this is the dynamic nature of sprit, what moves it, the coming out of itself into the world. Recognition for the creator is to be protected and for this reason intellectual labour is both the alpha and omega of property – it is where it begins to where it ends, in the individual being-with the community.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Hegel
  • Intellectual Property
  • Property Rights and Justification
  • Expressivist Theory of Property
  • Labour Theory of Property
  • Free Market Capitalism. Social Production
  • Socialism

مراجع

Ashcraft, R. (2013). Locke's two treatises of government. Routledge.
Birdal, M. (2007). Locke’s theory of property and its Marxist critique: A comparison between Locke and Marx on property right and individual liberties. İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi Mecmuası, 57(1).
Biron, L. (2014). Creative work and communicative norms. In M. van Eechoud (Ed.), The work of authorship (pp. 19–44). Amsterdam University Press.
Breakey, H. (2010). Natural intellectual property rights and the public domain. The Modern Law Review, 73(2), 208–239.
Brooks, T. (2012). Hegel's political philosophy. Edinburgh University Press.
Croce, B. (1952). Indagini su Hegel, e schiarimenti filosofici (Vol. 14). Laterza.
Davis, R. (1989). The conjunction of property and freedom in Hegel's philosophy of right. Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung, 1, 111–123.
Eecke, W. V. (1983). Hegel on economics and freedom. ARSP: Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie / Archives for Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy, 187–215.
Faraci, D. (2014). Do property rights presuppose scarcity? Journal of Business Ethics, 125, 531–537.
Frankfurt, H. (2018). Freedom of the will and the concept of a person. In Agency and responsibility (pp. 77–91). Routledge.
Gadamer, H.-G. (1976). Hegel's dialectic: Five hermeneutical studies. Yale University Press.
Habermas, J. (2002). The future of human nature. Oxford: Polity.
Hardimon, M. (1994). Hegel's social philosophy: The project of reconciliation. Cambridge University Press.
Hegel, G. W. F. (1979). System of ethical life (1803/4) (T. Knox & H. Harris, Trans.) & First philosophy of spirit (H. Harris, Trans.). SUNY Press.
Hegel, G. W. F. (1991). Elements of the philosophy of right (H. Nisbet, Trans.). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1821)
Hegel, G. W. F. (1999). On the scientific ways of treating natural law, on its place in practical philosophy, and its relation to the positive sciences of right (1802–1803). In Political writings (H. Nisbet, Trans., pp. 102–180). Cambridge University Press.
Hettinger, E. (1989). Justifying intellectual property. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 18, 31–52.
Honoré, A. (1960). Social justice. In R. S. Summers (Ed.), Essays in legal philosophy (pp. 61–94). Oxford University Press.
Kant, I. (1949). On a supposed right to lie from altruistic motives. In L. W. Beck (Trans.), Critique of practical reason and other writings in moral philosophy (pp. 346–350). University of Chicago Press.
Knowles, D. (1983). Hegel on property and personality. The Philosophical Quarterly, 33(130), 45–62.
Knowles, D. (2003). Routledge philosophy guidebook to Hegel and the philosophy of right. Routledge.
Locke, J. (1988). Second treatise of government. Two treatises of government (P. Laslett, Ed.). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1689)
McDowell, J. (2013). Having the world in view: Essays on Kant, Hegel, and Sellars. Harvard University Press.
Resnik, D. (2003). A pluralistic account of intellectual property. Journal of Business Ethics, 46, 319–335.
Richards, D. (2002). The ideology of intellectual property rights in the international economy. Review of Social Economy, 60(4), 521–541.
Rose, D. (2013). The ethics and politics of pornography. Palgrave MacMillan.
Rose, D. (2024). Hegel, the Greeks and subjectivity: The origins of modern liberty and the historical justification of liberalism. Journal of Philosophical Investigations, 48, 381–417. https://doi.org/10.22034/jpiut.2024.18459
Sreenivasan, G. (1995). The limits of Lockean rights in property. Oxford University Press.
Taylor, C. (1985). Hegel’s philosophy of mind. In Philosophical papers (pp. 77–96). Cambridge University Press.
Taylor, C. (2015). Hegel and modern society. Cambridge University Press.
Waldron, J. (1985). What is private property? Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 5, 313–349.
Westphal, K. (1993). The basic context and structure of Hegel’s philosophy of right. In F. Beiser (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Hegel (pp. xx–xx). Cambridge University Press.
Žižek, S. (2012). Less than nothing: Hegel and the shadow of dialectical materialism. Verso.
ارسال نظر در مورد این مقاله
CAPTCHA Image
مجله پژوهش های فلسفی
دوره 19، شماره 53 - شماره پیاپی 53
مقالات
شماره 53 زمستان 1404
دی 1404
صفحه 111-128

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار