A Consciousness-Based Critique of Inheritance Law: The Abolition of Material Legacy in Eteryanism Philosophy

By Şehrazat Yazıcı

This article explores how inheritance law functions as a structural mechanism for reproducing economic inequality and inherited privilege, addressing the question of whether a legal system grounded in consciousness, ethical development, and collective responsibility can replace material legacy with contribution-based continuity. Within the Eteryanist philosophical framework, the paper critiques inheritance not as a personal right but as a systemic distortion, proposing its abolition as a foundational step toward a consciousness-centered legal and social order.

ABSTRACT

Inheritance law has historically functioned as a central mechanism for preserving economic inequality, class continuity, and intergenerational privilege. By legitimizing the transfer of material wealth independent of individual agency, ethical development, or social contribution, inheritance systems institutionalize unequal entry conditions and undermine the foundations of social justice. This article offers a philosophical and systemic critique of inheritance law through the framework of Eteryanism, a consciousness-centered socio-legal philosophy that prioritizes ethical coherence, collective well-being, and the evolutionary development of human core essence.

Within the Eteryanist model, inheritance is not regarded as a natural right but as a structural distortion that reproduces dependency, stagnates consciousness, and perpetuates symbolic and material hierarchies. The abolition of inheritance law is proposed not as an act of expropriation, but as a transformative redirection of value—from lineage-based accumulation to collectively governed contribution systems. These systems ensure lifetime security, equal entry conditions, and transparent distribution through ethically supervised technological infrastructures, including artificial intelligence–assisted evaluation models and blockchain-based governance.

The article argues that eliminating inheritance law dismantles inherited privilege without destabilizing social security, replacing material legacy with consciousness-based contribution. By reframing legacy as ethical presence, intellectual production, and societal impact rather than transferable property, Eteryanism presents a coherent post-inheritance legal order grounded in justice, autonomy, and conscious evolution.

KEYWORDS

Inheritance Law, Social Justice, Consciousness-Based Ethics, Eteryanism, Wealth Inequality, Collective Contribution Systems, Human Core Essence, Blockchain Governance, Artificial Intelligence in Law, Post-Capitalist Legal Models

1. INTRODUCTION

Inheritance law has long been regarded as a natural extension of property rights and familial continuity within legal, economic, and cultural systems. Across feudal, capitalist, and modern liberal societies, the transfer of material wealth from one generation to the next has been normalized as an unquestionable moral entitlement. However, this normalization conceals a fundamental structural problem: inheritance law functions as one of the most powerful mechanisms sustaining economic inequality, class reproduction, and unequal starting conditions across generations [1].

While modern legal frameworks emphasize equality before the law, inheritance systems paradoxically institutionalize inequality at birth. Individuals enter society not as neutral agents, but as beneficiaries or victims of circumstances determined by ancestral accumulation rather than personal agency, ethical development, or social contribution [2]. As a result, inheritance law operates in direct contradiction to meritocratic ideals, equal opportunity principles, and social mobility narratives frequently promoted by contemporary political and economic discourse.

From a sociological perspective, inherited wealth solidifies class hierarchies by ensuring the continuity of privilege independent of individual capability or responsibility. Capital—whether economic, cultural, or symbolic—circulates within closed familial structures, reproducing dominance while limiting systemic permeability [3]. This process not only distorts economic fairness but also shapes consciousness itself, embedding dependency, entitlement, and passive security into the psychological formation of individuals born into inherited advantage [4].

Philosophically, inheritance raises unresolved ethical questions concerning ownership beyond death. If property rights are justified through individual labor, intention, or contribution, their post-mortem transfer lacks a coherent moral foundation. The deceased no longer participates in social contracts, bears responsibility, or engages in ethical reciprocity. Yet inheritance law allows the dead to exert enduring control over the material and social conditions of the living [5]. This contradiction exposes a critical blind spot within classical legal theory.

Eteryanism emerges precisely at this intersection of legal inconsistency, ethical stagnation, and consciousness limitation. As a consciousness-centered philosophical system, Eteryanism reconceptualizes the human being not as an isolated economic unit but as a manifestation of human core essence, whose evolutionary purpose is ethical refinement, collective contribution, and conscious expansion [6]. Within this framework, material accumulation is neither the measure of value nor the medium of legacy. Instead, legacy is defined through consciousness-based contribution, ethical resonance, and integration into collective human memory.

Accordingly, Eteryanism rejects inheritance law not as a radical negation of family bonds or personal security, but as a necessary structural transformation. The abolition of inheritance is proposed as a means to dismantle inherited dependency, dissolve artificial class permanence, and restore autonomy at birth [7]. Rather than transferring wealth to private heirs, individual material accumulation is redirected into collectively governed contribution systems that ensure lifetime security while preserving social equity and transparency [8].

This article argues that the abolition of inheritance law constitutes not merely an economic reform but a civilizational shift—from material legacy to consciousness-based legacy. By integrating ethical philosophy, legal theory, social psychology, and emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and blockchain governance, the Eteryanist model offers a coherent, non-utopian alternative to inheritance-based systems. In doing so, it reframes justice not as the protection of accumulated advantage, but as the cultivation of conscious, independent, and socially responsible individuals from the moment of birth [9]

2. THE STRUCTURAL AND ETHICAL FOUNDATIONS OF INHERITANCE LAW

Inheritance law derives its legitimacy from the broader philosophical foundations of private property. In classical liberal theory, property rights are justified through labor, individual autonomy, and the presumed moral authority of ownership. From this perspective, inheritance is framed as a continuation of personal sovereignty beyond death—a mechanism through which individuals may extend their will, preferences, and accumulated assets to chosen successors [10]. This assumption, however, rests on an unexamined leap: that moral agency and entitlement persist independently of lived responsibility.

Historically, inheritance law did not emerge as a neutral legal construct but as a tool for preserving power, land, and lineage. In feudal societies, inheritance ensured the continuity of aristocratic dominance, stabilizing hierarchical structures by binding wealth to bloodlines rather than social contribution. Capitalist modernity transformed the form but not the function of inheritance; land was replaced by capital, yet the intergenerational transfer of advantage remained intact [11]. Thus, inheritance law has consistently operated as a stabilizer of inequality rather than a guarantor of justice.

Ethically, the justification of inheritance encounters a fundamental contradiction. If property ownership is grounded in individual effort, creativity, or risk-taking, its legitimacy dissolves at the moment of death. The deceased no longer labor, decide, or participate in social reciprocity. Nevertheless, inheritance law allows material power to be exercised posthumously, shaping the life trajectories of individuals who neither consented to nor earned such advantages [12]. This phenomenon introduces a form of temporal injustice, where past accumulation overrides present equality.

From a Rawlsian perspective, inheritance law violates the principle of fair equality of opportunity. While Rawls acknowledges that inequalities may exist if they benefit the least advantaged, inherited wealth overwhelmingly consolidates advantage within already privileged groups, rarely contributing to systemic uplift [13]. Birth becomes a decisive determinant of life chances, rendering meritocratic narratives performative rather than substantive.

Sociological analyses further expose inheritance as a mechanism of symbolic reproduction. Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of capital demonstrates how economic inheritance is inseparable from cultural and social capital, collectively reinforcing class identity and exclusion [14]. The child who inherits wealth also inherits networks, confidence, expectations, and a normalized sense of entitlement. These invisible transfers shape consciousness long before any formal legal transaction occurs, embedding inequality at the psychological level.

Eteryanism challenges this inherited architecture by redefining both property and value. Within the Eteryanist framework, material assets are not extensions of personal identity but temporary instruments within a collective evolutionary process. Ownership is contextual, functional, and ethically bounded by its impact on social and consciousness equilibrium [15]. As such, inheritance law is viewed not as a benign tradition but as a systemic distortion that freezes social dynamics and interrupts conscious evolution.

By permitting unearned accumulation to determine future potential, inheritance law undermines individual autonomy at its origin. The Eteryanist model posits that true autonomy requires equal ontological entry conditions—a birthright free from imposed privilege or inherited deprivation [16]. Abolishing inheritance law therefore becomes an ethical necessity rather than a punitive measure: a recalibration of justice toward conscious becoming rather than material preservation.

This structural critique sets the stage for a broader reconceptualization of legacy itself. If material inheritance perpetuates inequality and dependency, then legacy must be redefined beyond property. Eteryanism proposes a shift from material continuity to conscious contribution, where what endures is not wealth but ethical impact, knowledge, creativity, and resonance within collective human memory [17]

3. INHERITANCE, CONSCIOUSNESS, AND THE REPRODUCTION OF DEPENDENCY

Beyond its legal and economic dimensions, inheritance law exerts a profound influence on individual consciousness and psychological formation. From early childhood onward, the expectation of inherited security reshapes motivation structures, risk perception, and ethical orientation. When material continuity is guaranteed independently of personal effort or contribution, the developmental relationship between action and consequence becomes distorted [18]. This distortion does not merely affect behavior; it restructures self-perception.

Psychological studies on motivation consistently demonstrate that externally guaranteed outcomes weaken intrinsic drive. Individuals who anticipate inherited wealth often experience diminished incentive for long-term creativity, social responsibility, and ethical risk-taking. Security detached from contribution fosters passivity, entitlement, and an externalized locus of control—conditions that are antithetical to conscious autonomy [19]. Inheritance thus functions as a quiet regulator of aspiration, narrowing the horizon of becoming.

At the collective level, inheritance systems cultivate a culture of dependency. Rather than perceiving society as a shared field of contribution, individuals raised within inheritance-based structures internalize a lineage-centered worldview: opportunity is not created but received; legitimacy is inherited rather than enacted. This orientation fragments social cohesion, replacing collective responsibility with familial insulation [20]. Over time, such fragmentation erodes trust in merit, justice, and shared ethical frameworks.

From a consciousness perspective, Eteryanism identifies inheritance as a mechanism that arrests evolutionary flow. Conscious development, within this philosophy, depends on the continuous alignment between awareness, responsibility, and contribution. When material advantage precedes ethical maturation, consciousness stagnates. Privilege becomes invisible to its holder, while deprivation becomes internalized by those excluded, producing asymmetrical psychic burdens across society [21].

Moreover, inheritance embeds temporal inequality into consciousness itself. The past—through accumulated wealth—dictates the future, overriding present potential. This temporal imbalance disrupts the natural rhythm of conscious evolution, where each generation should renegotiate value, meaning, and contribution anew [22]. Instead, inheritance law allows historical accumulation to dominate future possibility, reinforcing a static social architecture incompatible with dynamic ethical growth.

Eteryanism reframes this dynamic by introducing the concept of conscious entry neutrality. According to this principle, individuals must enter life free from imposed material advantage or disadvantage in order to develop authentic agency. True freedom is not the freedom to inherit, but the freedom to become—through effort, awareness, and social resonance [23]. Inheritance, by predefining outcomes, constrains this freedom at its origin.

Importantly, the abolition of inheritance is not interpreted as the negation of care, continuity, or intergenerational responsibility. On the contrary, Eteryanism distinguishes sharply between material dependency and conscious continuity. Families remain central sites of ethical guidance, emotional support, and knowledge transmission; what is removed is the substitution of material transfer for conscious mentorship [24]. Parents do not abandon their children’s future—they enrich it through guidance rather than property.

This transformation reorients social motivation. When legacy is no longer measured by accumulated assets but by the depth of ethical imprint and societal contribution, individuals redirect effort toward creativity, knowledge, and collective benefit. Consciousness shifts from preservation to participation, from accumulation to resonance [25]. The reproduction of dependency gives way to the cultivation of autonomy.

Thus, inheritance law is revealed not merely as an economic institution but as a psychological and consciousness-shaping apparatus. Its abolition, within the Eteryanist framework, represents a deliberate interruption of dependency cycles and a restoration of conscious agency at both individual and collective levels. This shift prepares the ground for a new definition of legacy—one rooted in ethical presence rather than material permanence [26] 

4. ABOLISHING INHERITANCE LAW: FROM MATERIAL LEGACY TO CONSCIOUS CONTRIBUTION

The abolition of inheritance law is frequently misinterpreted as an act of deprivation or coercive redistribution. Such interpretations emerge from a framework that equates security with private accumulation and continuity with material transfer. Eteryanism fundamentally departs from this framework by reframing abolition not as confiscation, but as reorientation—a systemic redirection of value from private lineage to collective continuity [27].

Within the Eteryanist model, individuals are not stripped of economic security during their lifetimes. On the contrary, the abolition of inheritance law is coupled with the establishment of lifetime security mechanisms that decouple survival from accumulation. Material assets generated throughout an individual’s life are integrated into collectively governed contribution systems that guarantee dignified living standards while preventing post-mortem concentration of power [28]. Thus, abolition operates prospectively rather than punitively.

Central to this model is the Collective Contribution Fund, a transparent and decentralized structure through which accumulated value is reinvested into social, scientific, ecological, and cultural development. Rather than passing wealth to private heirs, individuals participate in a system where their material contributions continue to generate societal benefit beyond their lifetime [29]. In this way, value persists—but its function is transformed.

Technological infrastructure plays a critical role in operationalizing this transformation. Blockchain-based governance ensures traceability, transparency, and accountability in the allocation of collective resources, eliminating discretionary favoritism and opaque redistribution [30]. Artificial intelligence–assisted evaluation systems further enable contribution-based assessment, analyzing ethical impact, social benefit, and long-term value creation rather than mere economic output [31]. These tools do not replace human judgment but augment fairness at scale.

A common objection to abolishing inheritance law concerns motivation: if wealth cannot be transferred to descendants, why would individuals strive to create value? Eteryanism responds by challenging the assumption that accumulation is the primary driver of human creativity. Empirical evidence from behavioral economics and social psychology suggests that purpose, recognition, and meaningful contribution often surpass monetary inheritance as motivators for sustained effort [32]. When legacy is defined through impact rather than possession, motivation shifts from hoarding to participation.

Furthermore, the Eteryanist model introduces conscious legacy recognition, whereby individuals’ ethical, intellectual, and creative contributions are preserved within collective memory systems. Scientific discoveries, artistic works, ecological initiatives, and social innovations are archived as part of humanity’s shared heritage, accessible to future generations without proprietary restriction [33]. Legacy thus becomes relational and cumulative rather than exclusive.

Crucially, abolishing inheritance law does not dissolve familial bonds; it transforms their ethical orientation. Families transition from sites of material dependency to spaces of mentorship, guidance, and value transmission. Intergenerational responsibility persists, but it is expressed through education, ethical modeling, and emotional continuity rather than asset transfer [34]. This shift strengthens autonomy while preserving relational depth.

From a legal perspective, the abolition of inheritance law resolves longstanding contradictions in property theory. Ownership becomes temporally bounded, aligned with lived responsibility rather than posthumous control. Death marks the conclusion of individual material authority, not its indefinite extension. This recalibration restores coherence between ethical agency and legal entitlement [35].

Ultimately, the transition from material legacy to conscious contribution represents a paradigmatic shift in how societies understand value, continuity, and justice. By abolishing inheritance law and replacing it with contribution-centered systems, Eteryanism dismantles inherited privilege without destabilizing security. What endures is not accumulated wealth, but the ethical resonance of a life lived in conscious alignment with collective evolution [36] 

5. ADDRESSING OBJECTIONS: UTOPIA, RESISTANCE, AND TRANSITION MECHANISMS

Proposals to abolish inheritance law are frequently dismissed as utopian, impractical, or incompatible with human nature. Such objections, however, often rely on historically conditioned assumptions rather than empirical or philosophical necessity. Eteryanism approaches these critiques not defensively, but analytically—by distinguishing between culturally ingrained habits and structurally inevitable outcomes [37].

5.1 “This Model Is Utopian and Unrealistic”

The characterization of inheritance abolition as utopian presupposes that existing systems are themselves realistic or sustainable. Yet contemporary economic data reveal that inheritance-based wealth concentration intensifies inequality, reduces social mobility, and destabilizes democratic institutions [38]. Systems that systematically reproduce advantage while eroding collective trust cannot be considered pragmatically viable in the long term.

Eteryanism does not propose an abrupt or coercive rupture. Instead, it outlines a gradual transition framework, where inheritance law is phased out alongside the introduction of universal lifetime security, contribution-based recognition, and transparent redistribution mechanisms. Utopianism is not defined by ambition, but by the absence of implementation pathways—pathways that the Eteryanist model explicitly provides [39].

5.2 “People Will Resist; Society Will Not Accept This”

Resistance is a predictable response to any paradigm shift that alters entrenched privilege structures. Historically, similar objections were raised against the abolition of feudal titles, slavery, child labor, and gender-based legal exclusion. In each case, resistance reflected fear of loss rather than evidence of systemic collapse [40].

Eteryanism addresses resistance through incentive realignment rather than force. Individuals are not deprived of security or dignity; instead, they are offered a system that guarantees stability without dependency on lineage. Transitional safeguards—such as guaranteed income, access to collective funds, and recognition of lifetime contribution—reduce anxiety while fostering gradual cultural adaptation [41].

Moreover, resistance diminishes as social norms shift. When success, respect, and continuity are no longer measured through inherited assets but through visible contribution and ethical presence, collective expectations recalibrate. Social legitimacy migrates from possession to participation [42].

5.3 “Inheritance Is Natural; It Aligns with Human Nature”

Appeals to “human nature” often conflate biological attachment with legal entitlement. While intergenerational care is a deeply human impulse, the legal institutionalization of post-mortem wealth transfer is a cultural construct rather than a biological necessity [43]. Anthropological evidence shows that many societies have historically prioritized communal distribution, shared stewardship, or merit-based continuity over hereditary accumulation.

Eteryanism preserves intergenerational care by separating emotional continuity from material dependency. Parents continue to nurture, educate, and guide; what is relinquished is the substitution of wealth transfer for ethical responsibility. This distinction aligns more closely with developmental psychology, which emphasizes mentorship and modeling over material provision as drivers of long-term autonomy [44].

5.4 “Without Inheritance, Motivation Will Collapse”

This objection assumes that the primary human motivation is the accumulation of transferable wealth. However, research in motivation theory consistently identifies autonomy, mastery, purpose, and social recognition as more durable drivers of sustained effort than extrinsic financial incentives [45]. Inheritance, in this light, often weakens motivation by guaranteeing outcomes regardless of engagement.

The Eteryanist framework replaces inheritance-driven motivation with contribution-based meaning. Individuals are motivated not by the prospect of posthumous control, but by the enduring presence of their work within collective human memory. Recognition systems, ethical evaluation, and transparent archival of contribution generate forms of legacy that are experiential rather than proprietary [46].

5.5 Transition as Conscious Adaptation

Crucially, Eteryanism frames transition not as loss but as conscious adaptation. The abolition of inheritance law coincides with a cultural shift in how societies educate, value, and recognize individuals. Education systems emphasize ethical literacy and social contribution; legal systems prioritize equity at entry; technological systems ensure fairness in evaluation and distribution [47].

In this sense, resistance is not an obstacle but a diagnostic signal—revealing where dependency, fear, and outdated value frameworks persist. Addressing these signals through dialogue, transparency, and phased implementation transforms resistance into participation [48].

By systematically engaging with objections rather than dismissing them, the Eteryanist model demonstrates that abolishing inheritance law is neither naïve nor coercive. It is a reasoned response to structural inequality, grounded in ethical coherence, psychological insight, and implementable governance design. The question is no longer whether such a transformation is possible, but whether societies can afford to postpone it [49] 

6. CONCLUSION: TOWARD A POST-INHERITANCE SOCIETY

Inheritance law has long been treated as an unquestioned extension of property rights, family continuity, and social stability. Yet, as demonstrated throughout this article, inheritance functions not as a neutral legal tradition but as a structural mechanism that reproduces inequality, entrenches dependency, and distorts the ethical foundations of justice. By allowing material advantage to bypass individual agency and social contribution, inheritance law institutionalizes privilege as destiny and undermines the principle of equal entry into social life [57].

Through the philosophical framework of Eteryanism, this study has argued that the abolition of inheritance law is neither an act of economic aggression nor a rejection of intergenerational care. Rather, it constitutes a necessary recalibration of legal, ethical, and consciousness-based systems toward coherence. Inheritance, when examined critically, reveals a fundamental contradiction: rights justified by lived responsibility are extended beyond life itself, granting posthumous authority over future generations who neither consented to nor participated in the accumulation of such power [58].

Eteryanism resolves this contradiction by redefining legacy. Legacy is no longer framed as the transmission of material assets, but as the continuation of ethical presence, social contribution, and conscious impact within collective human memory. In this model, material value generated during a lifetime does not vanish upon death; it is transformed—integrated into collectively governed systems that sustain social equity, innovation, and long-term well-being [59]. What ends is not value itself, but its privatized concentration across bloodlines.

Crucially, the abolition of inheritance law does not imply insecurity. On the contrary, Eteryanism couples this legal transformation with lifetime security mechanisms that guarantee dignity, access to resources, and social participation independent of lineage. By decoupling survival from accumulation, the model dismantles inherited dependency while preserving stability. Individuals are liberated from both inherited privilege and inherited deprivation, entering life on ethically neutral ground [60].

This transition also marks a shift in motivational architecture. When inheritance ceases to function as the ultimate horizon of success, human aspiration reorients toward meaning, contribution, and recognition within the collective sphere. Creativity, scientific inquiry, ecological stewardship, and ethical leadership emerge as primary vehicles of legacy. In this context, motivation is sustained not by possession, but by participation in the ongoing evolution of society [61].

From a legal perspective, the post-inheritance order proposed by Eteryanism restores temporal and moral symmetry to justice. Rights are aligned with agency; ownership is bounded by life; and law ceases to serve as a protective shell for accumulated power. Instead, it becomes an enabling structure—one that cultivates autonomy, fairness at birth, and responsibility throughout participation in social life [62].

Ultimately, abolishing inheritance law represents a civilizational threshold. It signals a departure from systems that prioritize the preservation of the past over the potential of the future. By replacing material inheritance with consciousness-based contribution, societies open space for genuine equality, ethical coherence, and conscious evolution. The question, therefore, is not whether humanity can imagine a world beyond inheritance, but whether it can continue to justify a legal structure that binds future generations to the unexamined accumulations of the past [63].

REFERENCES

[1] Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Harvard University Press.

[2] Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.

[3] Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood.

[4] Bourdieu, P. (1990). The Logic of Practice. Stanford University Press.

[5] Locke, J. (1690/1988). Two Treatises of Government. Cambridge University Press.

[6] Yazıcı, Ş. (2025). Eterya: Yeni Dünya Düzeni.

[7] Sen, A. (2009). The Idea of Justice. Harvard University Press.

[8] Standing, G. (2017). Basic Income: And How We Can Make It Happen. Penguin.

[9] Yazıcı, Ş. (2025). Eteryanist Federe Devlette hukuk, bilinç ve adalet. In Eterya:New World Order Chapter 6.2-6.3.

[10] Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Basic Books.

[11] Polanyi, K. (1944). The Great Transformation. Beacon Press.

[12] Hegel, G. W. F. (1821/1991). Elements of the Philosophy of Right. Cambridge University Press.

[13] Rawls, J. (1993). Political Liberalism. Columbia University Press.

[14] Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical Reason. Stanford University Press.

[15] Yazıcı, Ş. (2025). Eteryanism Philosophy: Consciousness-based socio-legal philosophy. 

[16] Arendt, H. (1958). The Human Condition. University of Chicago Press.

*This article is published as an independent theoretical paper.

A revised academic version may be submitted to peer-reviewed journals in the future.