Philosophy 103

agree to Sartre, a philosopher from the World War II and Cold War eras, populate willing bring out the world around them, thus manipulating their lives. By doing this, they create certain limitations, while also creating to a greater outcome possibilities. Sartre created his philosophical theory at a clock in history when more hatful were adequate to afford more amenities and luxuries for themselves. More and more industries, companies, and manufacturers were popping up around the world. This created a global human interest in possessing more amenities, especi on the wholey in a democratic society. mess were now able to non only afford the items they driveed in order to sustain a normal modus vivendi, scarce they could bear things that could entertain them and bring them happiness. This is a modus vivendi that has continued on through today. Many people argue that the drug abuse of buying unnecessary items as opposed to buying those that be full of life sentence has b ecome worse oer time. Many of us wonder wherefore this is the case. Sartre states that people may not become what they wish to be because they are too busy concentrate on their material possessions instead of foc development on improving their moral selves.It is the responsibility of the person to patch up what is genuinely important in their lives. Sartre also makes a few more important notations towards his theory. First, many people remember that they will only be define by the items in which they possess. People think they will only be accepted socially if they possess items that are assumeed to be attractive to others. People also think they are only defined by what they gravel, not by who they are as people. However, Sartre also says, in reality, the world in which we live in is not composed of all the material possessions.But we hunt d take to tactile property complete when we do possess these. It is our way of escaping responsibility. A free market constantly mani pulates us, and it is easy for us to fall into its trap. When choosing whether or not to splurge on luxury items, we tend to evaluate our lifestyles and consider what are values truly are. When we evaluate our lifestyles, we fulfill ourselves in which we think will improve our overall lifestyle. Our values become our material possessions, therefore for build upting what is morally significant in our lives.It is all up to the way in which we evaluate things and our ability in attempting to resist our negative and insignificant assumptions of ourselves and the lifestyles we subscribe to maintain. When doing this, we usually create beats for ourselves to abide by. We only will invest in the most expensive items because we believe it will make us place more superior to everyone else. By doing this, we for survive about what is important our consciousness of our spending habits with our money.For example, when it comes to buying a car, we forget about the role a car is meant to play in our lives. As opposed to focusing on its ability to get us from place to place, we only focus on the way it looks, how fast it can go, how good the sound system is, how graduate(prenominal) we can have it lifted, etc. By doing this, people lose upsurge of what is morally important like shelter, food, and ones own livelihood. We chance upon this a quite a little in our everyday lives. You see this on billboards, over the radio, in magazines, in movies, and especially on television. According to dictionary. om, a vendor is defined as A person whose duties include the identification of the goods and operate zestd by a set of consumers, as well as the marketing of those goods and services on behalf of a company. This means that the job of the vendor is to convince the average consumer that they need their product, and this is where more often then not people confuse Luxuries versus needs. First lets start by defining need. In the strictest sense of the word, a need is some thing that you have to have to get by in this world a necessity.You need food, shelter, clothing, medical care, which are all examples of the basics. You will probably experience physical condenseing of some var. if you dont have your needs met. On the other hand, a Luxury is something that you desire something you would like to have. But by no means will you suffer in any way except perhaps mental anguish, if you dont get the thing you compliments. Wants quite often fall into the category of Luxuries, nice to have, but the world wont end without them. The hard part comes when you live in a prosperous capitalistic society, like ours.The western standard of living is so high that blush many of our poor tend to live to a higher place the level of basic needs. In 1998, 97% of poor Americans (as defined by the Census Bureau) owned a television something that could definitely be considered a luxury. In many third-world countries, less than 30% of the population even has approach shot to electricity, which most westerners would consider an absolute necessity. My intention is not to make anyone savour guilty its simply to point out that the distinction between want and need is often relative.It depends on the area in which you live, the company you keep, the lifestyle you look at, and the expectations of the society around you. We are influenced, every day, by the popular ending around us. Television, magazines, movies, and advertising have all done a elegant job of programming us to think that we need a lot of excess consumable goods. Pretend that you are watching TV or flipping through your favorite magazine and see an ad for something awesome. Suddenly, your heart speeds up, and you get a tingly feeling in your gut. Its perfect, how had you ever lived without it before?You rush effective to the store, what? You dont have any left in stock? Your heart sinks and you feel a rush of disappointment. You spend the rest of the day moping because you couldn t find it anywhere. Now, this power be a bit of an exaggeration, but its not far murder the mark for some people. How often have you learned of a bleak product and were certain that you absolutely had to have it? What if you had never seen the ad? Would your life be any worse off? Its as if the knowledge that something exists causes the need for it. Thus brings up the age-old saying of keeping up with the Joneses.With the approach of the global society, the Joneses are not provided the people contiguous ingress anymore. They include movie stars and billionaires and imaginary people on TV that dont even really exist. But we hold these folks up as the standard against which we should measure our own lives. Just because Bill Gates has a multi-million sawbuck house, we think ours is too small. Certainly, no one is suggesting that one gives away everything they own and become a monk, but it is important that one strikes a balance between those things that they have to have and the things that they would like to have.It is also important that people be able to prioritize their spending. The goal is to focus on those things that will really improve ones quality of life, rather than just look flashy. Heres a perfect example of prioritizing between two wants. Wouldnt it be nice to retire early? Not have to work, spend your time doing what you want? And lets say that while you are thinking about untalkative early, you are also looking to buy a house. You could choose the $500,000 denture with 10 bedrooms, or you could choose the smaller, less-expensive house that meets all of your basic needs.If you choose the expensive home, you can probably kiss retiring early goodbye. But, if you decide that retiring early would improve your quality of life more than having a huge flashy house, the choice is simple. This coincides with Sartres theory of self-responsibility. He defines it as individuals are responsible for their choice, i. e. , they are the incontestable aut hor of their act. This means that some(prenominal) decision a person makes, whether it be good or bad, is their own personal responsibility.For example, when a professional athlete is caught cheating by using steroids, throwing a fight, or betting on themselves, etc. they are in person responsible for the actions that take place thereafter. This also applies to Sartres theory on responsibility for others. He states that, in choosing for ones self, one is thus also choosing for others and is to that extent responsible for the others. So by having the professional athlete cheat, he or she is also affecting others, such as fans, the teams image, and their teammates, with their actions.Sartres teachings on existentialism are a perfect example for the subject of Luxuries versus necessities. His idea of personal responsibility and the responsibility of others shows that in Sartres centre of attentions every consumer is responsible for themselves and if their actions cause a negative chemical reaction on the rest of society they person responsible for this change be held accountable. When choosing between necessities and luxuries its up to ones own moral thought to decide what is considered a necessity or what is a luxury. So next time your out buying something think to yourself what kind of effect could this it have on society?