Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, I can only speak for me personally - but my profession is one of the most competitive and cut-throat out there. So - I realized a long time ago that in order for me to survive - I had to concentrate on myself and my own life and not focus on everyone else around me. And what I came to understand about myself is that all the money or success in the world woulnd't mean a darn thing to me if I didn't have my husband, my dog, my family, and my friends. So what do I care what everyone else has if I already have the things that bring me true happiness?
I honestly was kidding (in #16) - so I used (I think) the appropriate icon. Apologies if I offended anyone - it wasn't the intention.
I honestly was kidding (in #16) - so I used (I think) the appropriate icon. Apologies if I offended anyone - it wasn't the intention.
You didn't offend me at all - merely gave me food for thought! I knew you were not being serious - but it still made me reevaluate if I had in fact been honest in my answer!
Dogfighting is illegal and immoral. Mine's an Aussie Shep. She rocks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewdrop93
LOL!!! Mine's a shih-tzu. I never meant for our dogs to fight - mine wouldn't stand a chance! I'm putting my boxing gloves on right now! Well, as soon as I go buy some boxing gloves... And learn how to box...
Watch out...your dogs are beauties and mine is a male Japaneses Spitz who would probably love to be intimate with yours...
For millions of years, the most competetive apes were the most sucessful breeders. Eventually, the urge for competition was bred into the psyche of the hominids which followed, simply because those were the beasties that survived to have more offspring. Competition is just as natural to us as walking on two legs, in other words and is a result of the natural processes of evolution.
It's only been about a century since life has become extremely comfortable for the masses here in America. But millions of years of evolution don't just go away with such a quick change...the urge is still built in to most every human, and since our real needs are pretty much met, we find other ways to express it. Hence the silly contest with the "joneses".
Advertisers know this, of course. They depend on people's competetive nature to create trends, manufacture desires and otherwise keep us running on the hampster wheel so they can profit from it. Silly monkeys...
This understates the real issues and mis-characterizes the providers of material things. We humans develop an enormous inventory of social psychological needs . . . that unlike the physiological . . . are very difficult to satisfy. All needs are tied to our survival in intricate ways. Through learning we associate various things in our environment with the ability to satisfy those needs . . . so when those needs gain priority they get expressed as wants.
Advertising is just one form of learning about the social psychological needs that things can satisfy. If large numbers of our fellow human beings learn through advertising that Louis Vitton products are extremely valuable . . . then when we want to show our friend that we truly value them and their friendship . . . giving them a Louis Vitton gift would accomplish that.
Without that learning about material objects we would have to find another way to do it. Unfortunately, unlike the animals . . . we have an almost inexhaustible set of such social psychological needs that seldom if ever get satisfied. As they rise in priority from being ignored and unsatisfied over the years . . . they become an increasingly disturbing source of dissatisfaction and motivation to want things.
Suppose someone were one of God's worst creations . . . no personality, no looks, no character, . . . a complete social loser. He would spend the majority of his life gaining no satisfaction of ANY of his social psychological needs. By the time he reached middle-age . . . he would be in awful psychological shape. He might end up in a Texas Tower shooting people at random . . . (if he didn't pull a Columbine at a younger age). But his distant uncle leaves him a sizable inheritance. (Remember he has NEVER gotten any respect or positive treatment from anyone in his entire life up to this point.)
He sees this Ferrari dealership and is attracted to the cars. He goes in and the salesman learns he is capable of purchasing one. He begins to get all sorts of very positive social attention and concern. He immediately begins to experience satisfaction of those pent-up needs . . . it is almost orgasmic. He buys the Ferrari and as he is driving it he notices people noticing him and he guns it leaving a little rubber. He is even more orgasmic because he KNOWS you are impressed by his Ferrari . . . and those long-unsatisfied social psychological needs are being met. You spot him drive by and actually say . . ."Look at that loser in a Ferrari . . . he thinks he's a big deal." He doesn't hear that . . . because he KNOWS you are impressed.
This is a deliberate exaggeration to make a point about the ability of material things to satisfy social psychological needs we do not have the ability to get satisfied any other way on our own. But I hope you get the point.
This understates the real issues and mis-characterizes the providers of material things. We humans develop an enormous inventory of social psychological needs . . . that unlike the physiological . . . are very difficult to satisfy. All needs are tied to our survival in intricate ways. Through learning we associate various things in our environment with the ability to satisfy those needs . . . so when those needs gain priority they get expressed as wants.
Advertising is just one form of learning about the social psychological needs that things can satisfy. If large numbers of our fellow human beings learn through advertising that Louis Vitton products are extremely valuable . . . then when we want to show our friend that we truly value them and their friendship . . . giving them a Louis Vitton gift would accomplish that.
Without that learning about material objects we would have to find another way to do it. Unfortunately, unlike the animals . . . we have an almost inexhaustible set of such social psychological needs that seldom if ever get satisfied. As they rise in priority from being ignored and unsatisfied over the years . . . they become an increasingly disturbing source of dissatisfaction and motivation to want things.
Suppose someone were one of God's worst creations . . . no personality, no looks, no character, . . . a complete social loser. He would spend the majority of his life gaining no satisfaction of ANY of his social psychological needs. By the time he reached middle-age . . . he would be in awful psychological shape. He might end up in a Texas Tower shooting people at random . . . (if he didn't pull a Columbine at a younger age). But his distant uncle leaves him a sizable inheritance. (Remember he has NEVER gotten any respect or positive treatment from anyone in his entire life up to this point.)
He sees this Ferrari dealership and is attracted to the cars. He goes in and the salesman learns he is capable of purchasing one. He begins to get all sorts of very positive social attention and concern. He immediately begins to experience satisfaction of those pent-up needs . . . it is almost orgasmic. He buys the Ferrari and as he is driving it he notices people noticing him and he guns it leaving a little rubber. He is even more orgasmic because he KNOWS you are impressed by his Ferrari . . . and those long-unsatisfied social psychological needs are being met. You spot him drive by and actually say . . ."Look at that loser in a Ferrari . . . he thinks he's a big deal." He doesn't hear that . . . because he KNOWS you are impressed.
This is a deliberate exaggeration to make a point about the ability of material things to satisfy social psychological needs we do not have the ability to get satisfied any other way on our own. But I hope you get the point.
Sure my example is a little bit simplistic, but it still holds true. Remember people judge their status by their peers, and it doesn't matter so much what those peers actually think, but what people think their peers think. The ultimate natural urge boils down to the need of the individual to feel successful. How that ends up looking depends on many variables, including the culture, time, place, ect. If you lived in with a Papua New Guinea tribe for example, you'd be 'da bomb if you had the most pigs, wives and the sweetest penis sheath. But In America, you'd be at the bottom of social pile with official freak status.
It's not really about the personal pleasure gained from the "luxury" item. If pure orgasmic pleasure was the ultimate goal, why does everyone in my neighborhood have a Viking stove in their kitchen that almost never gets used? Why buy a Mercedes or BMW sedan when a Chevy or Hyundai will do the job just as well?
And it's beyond merely showing off too... I know people that own Ferraris and even a neighbor that has a Shelby Cobra, but they almost never leave the garage. The satisfaction for the owner comes from just possessing it, not showing it off.
The same goes for owners of rare art; nobody walks down the street with their origional Monet on their chest just so everyone can see how "special" they are for owning it; the painting stays inside where almost nobody will see it.
The owner's personal self esteem is built by being able to acquire such items, satisfying their natural need to feel like they are competing well when they compare themselves to their peers.
I bring advertising into it because the natural urge is completely manipulated and abused in the process of hocking junk. The " keeping up with the joneses" contest is turned on it's end the game gets taken out of context by deliberate efforts to make it impossible to find satisfaction.
A brand new Toyota Yaris with AC, power everything, CD player, ect is quite the luxury, but it pales in comparison with a Camry, wich sucks compared to a Lexus. But even the Lexus is pathetic next to a Bentley, which is a pauper's car next to a Maybach.
Why?! there is no reason. A Yaris will get you places just as good as a Maybach would. It's a completely manufactured continuum, a game with the ultimate purpose of making those along the continuum feel inadequate with what they've got and wanting more.
Plus, advertising (coupled with globalism) knows no boundaries. Even someone in desperate poverty in a Favella of Rio knows a Maybach and a beachfront mansion in Palm Beach is an ultimate indication of "success" which they have no chance in hell of ever acquiring. Local indicators of success become irrelevant (pigs and a big penis sheath just don't cut it anymore ) and people fall into despair because their natural competition drive has not gone away and the "competition" has increased to include the entire world, including those they have no hope of competing against (or even need to). The game is played out of context. It works in reverse too, as the self appointed "masters of the universe" really feel that way because they are so much more "successful" than the majority of the world, even though they didn't necessarliy earn it.
Sure my example is a little bit simplistic, but it still holds true. Remember people judge their status by their peers, and it doesn't matter so much what those peers actually think, but what people think their peers think. The ultimate natural urge boils down to the need of the individual to feel successful. How that ends up looking depends on many variables, including the culture, time, place, ect. If you lived in with a Papua New Guinea tribe for example, you'd be 'da bomb if you had the most pigs, wives and the sweetest penis sheath. But In America, you'd be at the bottom of social pile with official freak status.
It's not really about the personal pleasure gained from the "luxury" item. If pure orgasmic pleasure was the ultimate goal, why does everyone in my neighborhood have a Viking stove in their kitchen that almost never gets used? Why buy a Mercedes or BMW sedan when a Chevy or Hyundai will do the job just as well?
And it's beyond merely showing off too... I know people that own Ferraris and even a neighbor that has a Shelby Cobra, but they almost never leave the garage. The satisfaction for the owner comes from just possessing it, not showing it off.
The same goes for owners of rare art; nobody walks down the street with their origional Monet on their chest just so everyone can see how "special" they are for owning it; the painting stays inside where almost nobody will see it.
The owner's personal self esteem is built by being able to acquire such items, satisfying their natural need to feel like they are competing well when they compare themselves to their peers.
I bring advertising into it because the natural urge is completely manipulated and abused in the process of hocking junk. The " keeping up with the joneses" contest is turned on it's end the game gets taken out of context by deliberate efforts to make it impossible to find satisfaction.
A brand new Toyota Yaris with AC, power everything, CD player, ect is quite the luxury, but it pales in comparison with a Camry, wich sucks compared to a Lexus. But even the Lexus is pathetic next to a Bentley, which is a pauper's car next to a Maybach.
Why?! there is no reason. A Yaris will get you places just as good as a Maybach would. It's a completely manufactured continum, a game with the ultimate purpose of making those along the continum feel inadequate with what they've got and wanting more.
Plus, advertising (coupled with globalism) knows no boundaries. Even someone in desperate poverty in a Favella of Rio knows a Maybach and a beachfront mansion in Palm Beach is an ultimate indication of "success" which they have no chance in hell of ever acquiring. Local indicators become irrelevant and people fall into despair because their natural competition drive has not gone away and the "competition" has increased to include the entire world, including those they have no hope of competing against (or even need to). The game is played out of context. It works in reverse too, as the self appointed "masters of the universe" really feel that way because they are so much more "successful" than the majority of the world, even though they didn't necessarliy earn it.
Am I making any sense here?
Everything you've said confirms what I said, Chango . . . we have an inexhaustible supply of SOCIAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL needs . . . (not physical or physiological). Fortunately, through learning we acquire an inventory of associations with material objects that are capable of satisfying those needs when there is no other way for them to be satisfied by our own innate capabilities. This means that . . . instead of a bunch of crazy unsatisfied lunatics running around frustrated . . . they have material objects that stand in for the real thing. You assume a car is to get somewhere, period . . .but my example and yours reveal that is the minor purpose. Our psychological needs and our social needs can be far more important in the purchase of material objects . . . depending on our level of satisfaction of those hard to satisfy needs. They are also all unique to each individual because our life experiences produce different levels of dis-satisfaction of our needs. Over time the most "out of balance" ones gain priority and drive our motivations and wants.
Everything you've said confirms what I said, Chango . . . we have an inexhaustible supply of SOCIAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL needs . . . (not physical or physiological). Fortunately, through learning we acquire an inventory of associations with material objects that are capable of satisfying those needs when there is no other way for them to be satisfied by our own innate capabilities. This means that . . . instead of a bunch of crazy unsatisfied lunatics running around frustrated . . . they have material objects that stand in for the real thing. You assume a car is to get somewhere, period . . .but my example and yours reveal that is the minor purpose. Our psychological needs and our social needs can be far more important in the purchase of material objects . . . depending on our level of satisfaction of those hard to satisfy needs. They are also all unique to each individual because our life experiences produce different levels of dis-satisfaction of our needs. Over time the most "out of balance" ones gain priority and drive our motivations and wants.
Yes... so essentially we are arguing the same point, just from different directions.
non-religion Q: why do we want to keep up with the joneses?
So my question is this. How does one defeat their basic nature and get off this @&#king hampster wheel? And don't tell me religion is the solution, because it ain't...
Americans' self-esteem rides on the status of their material possessions, people preoccupied with trying to impress each other.
So, the Joneses are the role models for the nation.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You didn't offend me at all - merely gave me food for thought! I knew you were not being serious - but it still made me reevaluate if I had in fact been honest in my answer!
) and people fall into despair because their natural competition drive has not gone away and the "competition" has increased to include the entire world, including those they have no hope of competing against (or even need to). The game is played out of context. It works in reverse too, as the self appointed "masters of the universe" really feel that way because they are so much more "successful" than the majority of the world, even though they didn't necessarliy earn it.
non-religion Q: why do we want to keep up with the joneses?
