It’s a great idea to own your own possessions when you are ready to take them on the road. I’m afraid that it’s just not possible for a person to live a life that’s less than perfect. It can be just a matter of time until you can’t.
To a certain extent, this applies to our own homes. We are constantly on the go. We live, eat, and breathe so many different things that it’s likely that there are things that you can’t live without. Like your toothbrush. Or your phone. Or your laptop. Or your car. Or your refrigerator. Or your car stereo. Or your bathroom, or your kitchen, or your bathroom sink.
This is why people don’t live in their own homes. Its just ridiculous to require that you own the house. It just makes it more difficult for people to live their lives. Its just not possible to have a life where you do everything perfectly.
It’s possible to have a life where you don’t have to worry about anything other than your own possessions. If you can’t have a life where you have a house, then you’re screwed.
The biggest problem we see with the demand for possession concept is that it actually encourages people to keep stuff they don’t really need in their homes. If you have a home that you don’t use, you may be doing yourself a favor by not buying into the demand for possession philosophy.
The demand for possession concept is a really interesting one. It’s nice that it’s a concept that takes into account the importance of owning what you use, but the demand for possession concept ignores that. By saying that you need to have a house to live in, you’re essentially saying that you should have no possessions. But you also say that you should only buy stuff you really need. So the demand for possession philosophy is the exact opposite of what we mean when we say that possessions are important.
Of course the demand for possession philosophy is not the only philosophy that disregards the importance of possessions. Its just one of the most common philosophies of living. But to say that you should only buy stuff you really need is a bit more nuanced than our demand for possession philosophy.
The demand for possession philosophy says that the only thing that determines whether you own something is a person or some arbitrary external factor like money. But the demand for possession philosophy also says that possessions are the product of human desires and decisions. This doesn’t make sense to me.
The demand for possession philosophy says that possessions are always the product of the will of the person who desires them, but the demand for possession philosophy says that possession is the product of the will of the person who does it.
This means that the owner of a possession can decide that they do not want it, or they may even not want it (say, because it is in their plans to destroy or steal it) or that they decide to sell it off. That is a choice that the owner can make and the owner can decide that they do not want the possession. It is a choice that the owner of a possession can make and the owner can decide that they do not want the possession.
