Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
how a consumer lifestyle can threaten how humans try to develop virtuos qualities?
my whole essay is different but i really can't find anything on this particualr strand of the essay and i thought the minds of DiS might be able to give me an idea or point me in the right direction.....and no im not lazy, far far from it.
It's still light.
has to be done along with another essay and an exam paper and 2 subjects worth of revision and c'work drafting.
so you're entirely mindset becomes aimed at how to accumulate more capital and afford more material posessions for yourself, which as an ideology can be incompatible with selfless actions.
to discuss that pigging Games Workshop conundrum again...?
I don't really like the initial statement, it comes very close to begging the question.
It seems to me that the proposition that "a consumer lifestyle can threaten how humans try to develop virtuos qualities"(sic) is merely a flowery rewording of the following:
A person who trades money for goods is less likely to develop a good sense of right and wrong than a person who does not.
If, instead, you are suggesting that a person who places more value in goods than they do in their own moral compass has worse morals than someone who does not place more value in goods then you would appear to be begging the question. Your definition of 'consumer lifestyle' relies on it being less virtuous than another, unmentioned lifestyle. From here, your argument is a straightforward case of 'placing a higher value in the accumulation of wealth than in <insert moral right here> is detrimental to one's value of <insert moral right here>' as theguywithnousername has pointed out.
Whilst this is a neat little package, I'm not really sure it says very much. Instead, I'd consider looking at the following question:
At what point does valuing goods and services by their monetary wealth become problematic?
I'd imagine your eventual answer to this will run along the lines of 'when it results in the undervaluing of another good'.
At which point I direct you to the following thread, and ask you to consider this and other moral quandries:
Just because you do not pay for particular things does not mean they lack worth, it just means their worth is measured in a different way. The exchange rate between the pound and whatever unit of currency you choose to represent 'moral goodness' is where the problem may or may not lie.
I'd suggest that a person who trades money for services also chooses not to trade money for services they do not want, or accept money for services they do not wish to perform (punching their mother in the face). Their moral compass is not dictated by their decision to live a 'consumer lifestyle' but by their exchange rate between two values, that of cold, hard cash and that of fuzzy love.
A more virtuous person may trade less or they may trade more, it depends on the goods in question and the ability of the person to value those goods correctly against their own moral compass. If the goods are valued correctly, I see no moral harm in any trade at all and so see no reason why someone cannot be both a consumer and the most virtuous person on the planet.
a couple of key ideas and points from there and make them my own, but my essay needs a bit of combing over first. thank you.