Philosophy 103

According to Sartre, a philosopher from the humankind War II and Cold War eras, people will create the world around them, thus manipulating their lives. By doing this, they create certain limitations, while also creating more(prenominal) possibilities. Sartre created his philosophical theory at a time in history when more people were able to afford more amenities and luxuries for themselves. to a greater extent and more industries, companies, and manufacturers were popping up around the world. This created a global human interest in possessing more amenities, especi ally in a democratic society. mess were now able to not only afford the items they take in order to sustain a normal lifestyle, but they could own things that could entertain them and bring them happiness. This is a lifestyle that has continued on through today. M whatsoever people argue that the habit of buying sp be items as opposed to buying those that ar vital has become worse over time. Many of us wonder why th is is the case. Sartre states that people may not become what they wish to be because they are overly busy stressing on their material possessions instead of focusing on improving their moral selves.It is the function of the person to decide what is really meaning(a) in their lives. Sartre also fares a few more important notations towards his theory. First, many people cogitate that they will only be defined by the items in which they possess. People think they will only be accepted socially if they possess items that are considered to be pleasant to others. People also think they are only defined by what they confound, 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 tend to feel complete when we do possess these. It is our way of escaping responsibility. A eject market constantly manipulates us, and it is easy for us to fall into its trap. When choosing whether or not to splurge on sumptuosity 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 lollting 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 unimportant assumptions of ourselves and the lifestyles we fill to maintain. When doing this, we usually create standards for ourselves to abide by. We only will invest in the most full(prenominal)-priced items because we believe it will make us appear more superior to everyone else. By doing this, we forget roughly what is important our consciousness of our spending habits with our money.For example, when it comes to buying a gondola, 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 spatial relation to place, we only focus on the way it work outs, how fast it can go, how good the sound system is, how high we can mystify it lifted, etc. By doing this, people lose sight of what is morally important the like shelter, food, and ones own livelihood. We see this a lot 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 Marketer is defined as A person whose duties include the identification of the goods and services desired by a set of consumers, as well as the marketing of those goods and services on behalf of a company. This means that the play of the marketer is to exchange the average consumer that they need their product, and this is where more a good deal then not people confuse Luxuries versus needs. First lets egress by defining need. In the strictest sense of the word, a need is both(prenominal)thing that you have to have to get by in this world a n ecessity.You need food, shelter, clothing, medical care, which are all examples of the basics. You will probably have a go at it physical suffering of some sort if you dont have your needs met. On the other hand, a extravagance 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 want. Wants quite often fall into the menage of Luxuries, nice to have, but the world wont end without them. The hard part comes when you live in a successful capitalistic society, like ours.The western standard of living is so high that level off many of our woeful tend to live above 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, slight than 30% of the population even has access to electricity, which most westerners would consider an abso lute necessity. My intention is not to make anyone feel guilty its simply to point out that the distinction amid want and need is often relative.It depends on the area in which you live, the company you keep, the lifestyle you choose, and the expectations of the society around you. We are influenced, every day, by the popular culture around us. Television, magazines, movies, and advertising have all done a splendid 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 right to the store, what? You dont have any leftfield in stock? Your heart sinks and you feel a rush of disappointment. You spend the rest of the day moping because you couldnt materialise it anywhere. Now, this might be a bit of an exaggeration, but its not far off the mark for some people. How often have you learned of a new product and were certain that you absolutely had to have it? What if you had neer seen the ad? Would your life be any worse off? Its as if the knowledge that something exists causes the need for it. so brings up the age-old saying of keeping up with the Joneses.With the advent of the global society, the Joneses are not full the people next door 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. retributive because Bill Gates has a multi-million dollar house, we think ours is too small. Certainly, no one is suggesting that one gives remote 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 chinchy. Heres a perfect example of prioritizing between two wants. Wouldnt it be nice to retire first? not have to work, spend your time doing what you want? And lets say that while you are thinking about restrained early, you are also looking to buy a house. You could choose the $500,000 home 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 originator of their act. This means that whatever decision a person makes, whether i t be good or bad, is their own ain responsibility.For example, when a professional athlete is caught cheating by using steroids, throwing a fight, or betting on themselves, etc. they are individual(prenominal)ly 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 topic of Luxuries versus necessities. His idea of personal responsibility and the responsibility of others shows that in Sartres eyes every consumer is responsible for themselves and if their actions cause a negative reaction on the rest of society they person responsible for this change be held accountable. Wh en choosing between necessities and luxuries its up to ones own moral judgment 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?