Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Luxury

[tragula]

Ever since I saw the movie Castaway, with Tom Hanks, I've been wondering a lot about cozy western lifestyles.

Life has become generally more secure and comfortable for most people, but we have also lost something. That raw struggle for existence, pitted mano a mano against mother nature.

I just can't help wondering if we are somehow less Alive then our ancestors.

Trapped in cubicles pecking away at keyboards, and closed in on all sides by machines and people doing things for us without our ever even realizing it half the time.

So is it a valid trade off. Or has society taken a wrong turn. Or are modern western lifestyles escalating to the point that it just seems more and more absurd.

Luxury cars, spas, modern appliances, disposable clothes. They seem to mean a lot more to people with a Sensing preference. Yet we are all somehow roped into the game to some degree. I've read that people living in 3rd world countries can't wait to start ordering fast food, using cell phones, and watching DVDs!

There's a question in there somewhere...

[SheepDog]

I have a rant on this one, but I don't have time to fully explore it. The short version is that if consumer goods made people happy, this would be one of, if not THE, happiest country on the planet. And the richest would be the happiest people in the world.

It turns out that it doesn't work that way. There's a "consumption treadmill" where you're never satisfied with what you have, but you always need more. There's an entire industry (advertising) out there working to keep you wanting more.

Suffice it to say, that I prefer a simpler life. I daydream about this quite often, as a matter of fact. It's not something I can do immediately, but I'm working toward it slowly. Eliminating debt was a major first step. I'm constantly acquiring skills as an ongoing process, with an emphasis on reducing reliance on others for basic survival needs.

I am glad that this question has come up. I'll add more later.

[Hypnos]

Where is the "both" option? Its absence indicates that you are every bit as ignorant as the benighted consumer drones you would deride.

[nBT]

Luxury cars, spas, modern appliances, disposable clothes. They seem to mean a lot more to people with a Sensing preference. Yet we are all somehow roped into the game to some degree. I've read that people living in 3rd world countries can't wait to start ordering fast food, using cell phones, and watching DVDs!

There's a question in there somewhere...

and the wall will not be soft.

how are all these 3rd world people going to produce these goods? or the money to pay for them? somehow americans missed a thing or two about advertising and exporting it to countries that have not had the history america has.

[tragula]

I wanted to make the choices deliberately stark. So people would be forced to choose and not sit on the fence. Perhaps "the good life" was not the best choice. "Pamper me and spoil me" would have done the trick better.

Well put Sheepdog. Consuming is endlessly addictive. And we use it to one up each other. And it makes no sense. (To us.)

Yet, somehow if I could have a widescreen tv to watch DVDs I think I'd be just a little bit happier. Hmmm.....

Not to mention the new digital camera I have my eye on.... sigh.

[s0978]

Why do you want to force people to choose and not sit on the fence?

Don't you think that lend toward an oversimplification of the issue you want to discuss? Most people probably share your ambivalence about our decadent consumerist culture.

[coffeezombie]

I don't consider my life luxurious but I suppose someone from a Third World country would. Nevertheless, I voted luxury is for sissies.

[Pierce]

"In today's world it is easy to become isolated from nature and the "stuff of life." We live in boxes, transport ourselves in boxes, and work in boxes. Yet there is an underlying current that draws us to desire a feeling of connection to nature -- to feel the wind on our faces and raindrops on our bodies -- to smell the statically charged air around us preceeding a thunderstorm. We do want to experience the "elements" and feel connected to nature -- at least in small doses -- and without giving up our accustomed comforts."

Perhaps ironically, this is taken from an article describing the the dominant buying motives of consumers. It's true that our deepest needs are not satisfied with any consumer item; however, as a material item serves to connect us to and fill a deeper abstract longing, we may associate that pleasure with the item.

["InsertNameHere"]

Frankly speaking, I rather think in the "box". Preferably the box would be located in the middle of the woods, with no other humans around but a robot that makes me mocha lattes every morning. A jacuzzi tub would be nice also.

[Serotonin]

;P I'm not voting. Because day in, day out I can get by on fairly simple things, living in a share house with friends, eating supermarket food, wearing no-name brand but comfortable clothes. Once in a while it's good to get out to a fancy restaurant, drink expensive cocktails, buy that amplifier you always wanted. But only on occasion. So your choices tragula are situation-dependent, and neither applies all the time.

If the corporations could do it they would privatise the raindrops that fell on our faces and the smell before the thunderstorm. They hate the fact that pleasure can come for free. Let's revel in it.

[euterpenc]

As always, balance is preferable, but I definately feel happiest when I'm being challenged, and I feel worthless when just "relaxing."

[MaroonBells]

I'll take luxury anytime. Luxury in a way that it serves my personal needs and beyond, not the extravagant display of wealth. A 12 bedroom house doesn't do me any good if I have to keep it up myself but I do like to be able to fit through the door.