How did materialism begin, and what can we replace it with?

[Deja Q]

I suppose it started in the 1980s, although in 1971, "All in the Family" pointed out the dubious nature of materialism as well.

On a pedantic personal note, I've lived a sheltered life, surrounded more by material things than with people. Bt I won't go there because people always hated me and I didn't even know why nor did I do anything to make people hate me. :cry:

However, materialism is not right nor is it a rational way to live. I will have no children to give my possessions to, who I'd guess wouldn't know what to do with it either. I certainly won't live forever. Technology dates so fast that within 3 years, I'll have thrown a lot of it out. What technology won't make useless, corporate america will. With a collection of 500+ VCR tapes, with the market currenty poking people away from VCRs, I will have 500 lumps of useless plastic in a very short period of time. Besides, with the FCC imposing HDTV on everyone, I'm already boycotting the industry (haven't bought $250 worth of DVDs so far, add in another $760 if I were to buy the Star Trek Next Generation series, which I wasn't going to do before anyway) and won't be upgrading to HDTV. Besides, money spent on such wants could have been saved for when nefarious, evil forces try to change society to their whim and/or I become redundant.

I digress. Indeed, can the system of materialism be changed?

[bloom]

1. I've noticed

it helps considerably to be around others who aren't so materially inclined.

It also helps to not read magazines and newspapers that have a lot of advertisements (or watch a lot of commercials, etc.)

[Bossy Monkey]

2. Immaterialism n/t

[Droopy]

3. It will have to sooner or later

I just finished an environmental science course at college and let me tell you that really opened my eyes. The pressure that we are putting on our natural resources is not sustainable. From paper products to fossile fuels and from aluminum cans to elctronics goods, all of it requires a serious drain on our natural resources to keep the show going at its current rate. Fifty years from now it will be impossible to live the way we do now. We will either adapt or run this wild show to its natural conclusion which isn't pretty.

[Deja Q]

10. 50 years? Wow, it's amazing what that will coincide with:

the total depletion of oil, which will bring our society to a cozy end, even if the other issues weren't involved.

Our society is obviously betting on betting the farm now and only expands because our society is not based on a perpetual balance but on continual growth - something we all know is utterly impossible, so why are we living like that?!

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

4. Materialism

The use of advertising to create a demand for a product, which I peg as the start of materialism, started in the 1920s. This was followed by the concept of planned obsolecense. This led to the concept of the 'throw away' society we have now.

The way to change the system of materialism is to start by changing people's hearts and minds. One can use science to help with this-subatomic physics show that we are, indeed, all interconnected (please check out the film "Mind Walk" for an entertaining way of explaining this interconnectedness and how it can be applied to the world today). Most mystical paths can connect one with Something far more satisfying than materialism, as well.

[jobycom]

5. I'd say it started the first time someone realized they could make more

of something than they could use, and they traded with someone else.

It drives the economy, it keeps people employed, it is the only hope we have of generating enough wealth to feed the world while curing fatal diseases and creating better living conditions for everyone in the world.

However, it sucks as a way to edify one's soul, or bring about happiness, and most every recorded philosopher from Plato to the Monkees have figured that out. Even Christ, which is why it's so ironic that those who claim to be his followers are so bad at following his advice.

What to replace it with? Deficits, tax cuts to the wealthy, and four more years of Bush should be enough to put us all in a more ascetic reality. It'll be more pure, I guess, but colder and hungrier.

[JM]

6. Foodaism...

is a great replacement

JM

[Snow]

7. It's all because westerners don't believe in reincarnation,

so they get all hung up on their physical bodies "You only get one go-round in this life, so grab for all the gusto you can!"

[starroute]

8. Scientific materialism? consumerism? just plain greed?

What you call "materialism" is a pretty vague area, and there are a lot of factors mixed into it.

For complicated mathematical reasons, prosperous societies have always tended to generate a small class of very rich people who want to show off their wealth. Some cultures have instituted mechanisms to counteract this. (Like potlatches, which constrain the rich to showing off their wealth by destroying part of it or giving it away, and therefore becoming a lot less rich.) Those which haven't inevitably tend to develop an upper class which flaunts their superior affluence and a lower class which envies it and tries to imitate it.

Scientific materialism as a philosophy goes back to the 17th century, when modern science developed, but became the dominant mind-set of the West in the late 1800's/early 1900's. By insisting that only material objects are real, scientific materialism tends to make its followers very fixated on accumulating physical stuff.

Consumerism as an economic doctrine began after World War II, when the US started sliding back into recession as the effects of the wartime economy wore off. From somewhere, the idea came to people that intensive advertising, planned obsolesence, and promoting the notion that it was absolutely essential to have the latest and best of everything could keep the economy ticking along at a wartime rate and make everyone prosperous. By the early 50's, the consumer economy was well established and accepted as a desirable norm. (The fact that the wartime economy had also been quietly revived under Truman was somehow conveniently ignored.)

Those three factors put together account for most of what you seem to be calling "materialism."

Of the three, I think consumerism has to be on its last legs. It was kind of a crock to begin with, and even though it sort of worked for a while, it's failing dismally now. If the world is ever going to get out of its current mess, somebody is going to have to invent an economic system that doesn't lead compulsively to recurrent manias of overproduction, followed by recessions and wars to bring supply back into line with demand.

Scientific materialism also isn't what it used to be. These days, information and intellectual "property" are far more valuable than mere physical stuff. What physical stuff we do value tends to be things like CD's and DVD's, which are merely vehicles for artistic expressions that could just as well be traded around as computer files. That is a large part of what the conflict over file-sharing is about -- it's the industries that got rich off materialism panicking as the new immaterialism slips through their fingers.

Basic greed and envy we may never be without, because they are built into human nature. But if the rich can at least be discredited as role models and shamed out of flaunting their wealth the way they have been, the rest of us might get back to behaving sensibly. (And maybe we could even turn the tax system into something like a potlatch, where the rich would be beguiled into showing off just how rich and powerful they are by paying far more in taxes than they do now, and where to withhold income from taxation would mean an intolerable loss of face.)

[Karenina]

9. I and "other"

The human ego is the sickest entity zo ever inhabit this planet. It is currently involved in a to-the-death competition with creation itself. (One guess who's gonna win this one). What's the answer? What's the question?

[TXvote]

11. Look to The 50's

for the birth of mass consumerism hysteria at the levels we now take for granted. With the advent of TV and the post depression era increase of disposable income consumption of disposable goods skyrocketed. Ironically enough, Nancy and Ronald Reagan were experimental poster children for the GE "dream house" outfitted with every modern convenience imaginable (by GE that is) and did more for keeping up with the Jones than ever before. The 80's consumerism is considered a post hippie backlash when the citizenry became disillusioned with self awareness and intrigued by eating eachother's souls to feel powerful. I personally believe it would have happened in the 70's but we were too broke in the recession from hell and the energy crisis.

the best thing I know of to battle the bulge of consumerism: Kill Your TV. In the 80's there was a movement in that direction and it was actually effective.

I have noticed lately a turning back to appreciating the simple things in life. I believe this is based in the fact that we are all broke, debt cannot be justified, and as a survival mechanism we had better get real about what is important.

Peace,
Teresa
www.votervirgin.com