‘26
organization. Although Aristotle (Barker, 1952) claimed that owning entails instinctive pleasures
of seif-love and benevolence, it was again not until the seventeenth century that Hobbes
(1650/1839) and Malebranche (1674/1963) described instinctive passions of superiority over
others as being manifest in the acquisition of property. Others in this tradition were Kant
(1798/1974), Stewart (1820), Schneider (1880), and Freud (1930). The salience of interpersonal
dominance motives in possessiveness led child psychologists (e.g. Isaacs, 1933; Lattke, 1935)
as well as psychiatrists (e.g. Adler, 1927/1968; Horney, 1937) to criticize the instinct theory of
property. However, ethologists (e.g. Ardrey, 1966; Strayer & Strayer, 1976), child psychologists
(e.g. Buehler, 1927; Furby, 1980), and social psychologists (e.g. Edney, 1974) came to describe
property as a manifestation of innate tendencies for dominance hierarchies and territorial
control.
The third historically extant explanation of property is that the possession and ownership
of property are prerequisites for altruistic sharing. Although this began with Aristotle (Barker,
1952), the place of dominance motivation in possession and sharing was not articulated until the
nineteenth century (e.g. Nietzsche, 1885/1973; Wundt, 1901). Child development research has
focused on possession and sharing as manifestations or strategies of leadership dominance
(e.g. Charlesworth & LaFreniere, 1983; Camras, 1984; Furby, 1978c; Merec, 1949).
The fourth historically extant explanation of property is that it is based on knowing. The
domination of others by means of possession based on knowing was first described by Aristotle
(Barker, 1952) in his justification of slavery and later developed by Nietzsche (1885/1973), Sartre
(1943/1956) and Eigen (1973). In a more cognitive vain, Titchener (1911) and Laborit (1978) have
described how familiarity can lead to defensive, territorial behavior.
The fifth psychological explanation of property apparent in historical review is that
property serves communicative functions, especially that of displaying superior status. Again,
Aristotle (Barker, 1952) may have first suggested this, but it was not until the seventeenth
century that Malebranche (1674/1963) explicitly theorized that a reputation of having property
ieads to control over others. Those in the social economic tradition such as Adam Smith
(Riesman, 1976), Spencer (1879/1893), and Veblen (1899/1912) argued that property serves to
synilbaizs and display prestige and social dominance. Research in achievement motivation
(e.g. Jackson, Ahmed & Heaps, 1976; McClelland, 1975) has shown small but positive
correlations between status and proprietary traits. Consumer psychologists (e.g. Belk, 1985a,b)
