Consumerism Is Justified By Kant, Singer, And Aristotle

Since the onset of consumerism, the major growth of consumption has caused society to improve their daily life. With new innovations such as washing machines, dishwashers, automobiles, and cell phones society is able to eliminate hard work and progress forward. The inventions and innovations created have enhanced the quality of many lives. The everyday labor around the house is reduced, we can talk to anyone from around the world at any time, and look up any kind of information without having to read a book. However many of these time saving and efficient innovations are purchased by people who have no need for these devices and purchased them un- necessarily as luxury items. There have been many essays written about the positive and negative

Many people do not understand what overselling capitalism with consumerism means. Based on the essay by Benjamin Barber, I have learned that people mistake the difference between what they want and what they actually need. In the essay he makes a contrast between capitalism and consumerism by giving examples throughout the essay. He also outlines the values of capitalism and how it has a positive impact on society and the impact of consumerism on people.

Consumerism leads to self-gratification and the loss of life’s important values such as friendship, love and religion; this is an ever-growing issue that manipulates and deceives society and has done so since the beginning of the technological age.

What Money Can’t Buy; The Moral Limits of Market by Michael Sandel argues the relationship between markets and our morality. His central concern is the influence of money on the sphere of life traditionally governed by nonmarket norms such as rights as a citizen, care for others, and civic duties. He demonstrated that market is responsible for destroying our sense of morality by placing monetary value to it. This paper will argue the relationship between market and morality through demonstrating the type of goods corrupted by money, the flaws in the market system that causes such problems, and the political solution for this problem as suggested by Michael Sandel respectively.

In this section Peter Singer's argument that humans spend too much money on items that are unnecessary will be examined and explained. In an interview Singer was asked the question, “what is morally wrong with me spending fifty dollars on a meal because I worked hard for that money?” In response Singer said that most of the people in the world no matter how hard they work, could not fathom spending that much money on a meal and that people who live in the 1st world take this money for granted as this expensive meal

Everyone in this modern society is obsessed with having the best of the best items and technology. The world economy consists of billions of transactions every day (Etzioni, 2012). In this society, three-fourths of those transactions are on things people do not need but desperately want just to fit in. These points were put very acutely when Etzioni said, “But when one attempts to satisfy these higher needs through the simple acquisition of goods and services, consumption turns into consumerism — and consumerism becomes a social disease” (Etzioni, 2012).

Everyone in this world has a fondness for purchasing goods. Everyone especially enjoys receiving brand new, state-of-the-art goods, whether it’s clothing, a cool fidget spinner, the latest iPhone, gaming console, or bape jacket, etc. No matter what it is, if money isn’t a problem, a person will remain relatively happy and healthy; they can have whatever they want! This state of mind has an official term: consumerism. In the book by Aldous Huxley, known as Brave New World, consumerism is a very prominent theme. As they say in the book, “The more stitches, the less riches” (Huxley, 1934, pg 51, p 10). Consumerism may sound nice to a lot of people in the world, but it’s actually a lot more complicated than we think it is--in a negative way.

Some people argue that it is acceptable for people in the United States to consume at high levels because their consumerism keeps the world economy going. What are the weaknesses in this idea? Although America’s consumerism may seem to help the economy of less fortunate countries, this rampant depletion has become financially and ecologically unsustainable. Globally, 86% of consumption expenditures comes from the 20% of the world’s people in first world countries, while the poorest 20% account for only a meager 14%. It seems that consumption has become a function of our culture. Only by generating and selling goods does capitalism currently work; and the more produced and purchased the more we have progress and prosperity.

As we are constantly exposed to mass media and popular culture in our modern society, the insidious nature of consumerism has allowed it to penetrate into every aspect of our lives, dictating our very beliefs, values and wants. Nearly every individual in our society subconsciously conforms to the shallow and superficial mindset that characterises our consumerist culture. This idea is highlighted by the following texts; the poem “Enter without so much as knocking” by Bruce Dawe, an extract from the sermon “The Religion of Consumerism” delivered by Peter House, the poem “Breakthrough” by Bruce Dawe, and the

Today millions of Americans who compulsively buy are creating a materialistic society. It is unfortunate that most Americans do not realize that when they have to buy something that everybody has, or are eating out continuously they are losing money. Us Americans are shopping for things like name brand items for the sake of our identity and the image we present to others. Name brand items are expensive, but you can almost always get the same quality item for a cheaper price. People are deliberately working to make money to buy these items. On the other hand, downshifters are cutting their work hours to put their values ahead of the amount of money they possess. Downshifters don’t mind what item they buy, they prefer to bargain shop, which allows

Consumerism is the center of American culture. Americans tend to confuse their wants with their needs. With new advances in technology, as well as the help of advertisers, people are provided with easy access to new products that seem essential to their everyday life, even though they have survived this long without them. People cannot live without food, clothing, and shelter. But realistically, according to people's different lifestyles, more than food, clothing, and shelter are needed. Most people need to work to survive. Unless a job is either in their own home, or within walking distance, a means of transportation is needed. Whether it be a vehicle, money for a taxi-cab, or a token for a ride on the subway, money must be spent

Whoever said money can’t buy happiness? Today, the argument can be made that happiness and consumerism are directly linked. It is fair to say that happiness is a relative term for different people. However, the obtaining of new and shiny things has become such a part of everyday life, that it provides happiness when people are purchasing something new, and causes sadness when no buying is taking place. For many, it seems to be a protective coating against the harsh realities of everyday stresses from a job, or family life.

Consumption, we describe as the act of meeting basic needs with material goods and the practice of consuming as a way of life is ‘consumerism’ ( Kennedy 173). The ideology that the meaning of life is found in buying things has really caused majority to spend almost their monthly salary on goods and services in search of utility. This excessive recreational spending also plays a part in increase of inflation, also has made more money in circulation.

Numerous moral theories have surfaced in the past years. They have been widely debated by philosophers and social reformers. It is important to understand what these theories are because of their influential tendencies in the way people act, especially in making morally right or wrong decisions. Utilitarianism is one of these many moral theories. Upon further analysis, problems with utilitarian thoughts are revealed. It has been widely debated by many philosophers, including G.E. Moore and Immanuel Kant. Like these two philosophers, I argue that utilitarianism is inadequate because of its contradictory nature as a moral theory. It highlights the principle of utility in seeking the greatest pleasure, allowing egotistic and hedonistic actions to be considered moral.

This argumentative essay will discuss the morality of one spending all their time and money on family and friends, rather than helping others. I will argue that it is morally correct to spend all your time and money on friends and family because every individual should be autonomous and govern their own life based on their values. I will argue this with the fact that as humans, we are rational beings and have the ability to give value to our beliefs through action. If a person believes that it is of greater importance to only dedicate their time and money to family and friends, then they must use their autonomy to act in such a way that affirms these beliefs. It is morally correct for a person to spend all their time and money on family