Comment: Not what I said

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Who owns your life? (see in situ)

Not what I said

All I was pointing out is that an argument that has as a premise the assertion that everything is owned by exactly one owner, is an argument based on a false premise. An argument based on a false premise is called an unsound argument.

FWIW my view would be that nobody owns me because persons are not "ownable" things. Slavery isn't really ownership, it's merely coercion under the guise of ownership. We don't have to define who "owns" infants, etc., because "ownership" isn't a relevant concept there. Trying to frame the question the author there seems to want to talk about (taxation, in part) as one of ownership gets the whole thing off to a bad start, with the logical fallacy known as a category error. IMO.