In Opposition of Acquiring Material Things, Essay Example

What does the acquisition of material things mean in relation to our humanity? This is the question that is the subtext of Dennis Prager’s provocative essay “In defense of acquiring material things”, where the author attempts to justify, in the context of the holiday seasons, the acquisition of material objects. For Prager, the consumption of material goods is not, as many religious and other leaders suggest, entirely negative: rather, material things provide their own enjoyment to the one who either gives them or consumes them. Yet the underlying philosophical question of Prager’s text is the following: what should be our relationship to the acquisition of material things? The problem with an argument such as Prager’s is that it defends the acquisition of material things within a culture that is already radically materialistic, a culture that is essentially a culture of consumption. The defense of the acquisition of material things, therefore, within such a context can only be viewed as an attempt to justify the dominant ideology of consumption and therefore fails to address adequately the many problems that arise with such an emphasis on goods and their acquisition.

Prager begins his piece by setting it within a particular context: the context of the holiday season. Prager states his position by opposing it to those who suggest, in light of the holiday season, that such consumption misses the point of this same season: for Prager, this is what he terms a platitude, which he defines as “words (that) sound nice but mean very little.” Prager is clear that he does not deny that things such as “love, religion, music, reading, health and other precious non-material things” are preferable to the culture of consumption. However, his argument is based on the premise that even if material things are not that which ultimately fulfills humanity, this does not mean we should reject them entirely. There is, for Prager, a clear happiness to giving as well as receiving material things, and this act should also be included into our definition of human happiness.

Certainly, Prager makes a valid point in suggesting that our lives are also constituted by our relation to the material world, and therefore, goods. After all, human beings do not exist in a vacuum: we do exist in a material world, dependent upon goods, dependent upon resources, for the very basic fact of survival. Prager does, at the same time, provide an accurate conception of the hierarchy of human needs: he states that there are things such as religion and love which are more significant to the human. But the fact that there are things that are more significant to the human does not also mean that those things which are “lower” down the hierarchy, such as material goods, should be rejected. In this regard, it can be suggested that Prager tries to take account of the diversity of the human’s relation to the world and therefore argues against the rejection of one aspect of this relation, i.e., the acquisition of material goods, because it stands lower on the “hierarchy” he establishes in his article.

Yet the problem with Prager’s argument is that when such public figures make a stand against materialism they are making a stand against a society in which this hierarchy which Prager also identifies has been turned upside down: the defining aspect of a capitalist and consumerist society is the acquisition of material goods. This is what such figures are protesting against when they seek to remind us of the importance of other values during the holiday season: they are attempting to argue that our values have been reversed, that the emphasis on material things has obscured our view of what is truly important. In other words, Prager presents what is called a “straw man” argument: those who criticize materialism and consumption are not denying that a human being also can feel pleasure at acquiring material goods, but that this has become the defining value of our capitalist society at the expense of the more important values, such as love, a shared humanity, religion, etc., which Prager also acknowledges.

Prager places his argument in the context of the holiday season, but the true context of such arguments against materialism and consumption is the context of a society that is all the more defined by this same materialism and consumption. The holiday season, in this regard, becomes a time of year when we can try to get our values straight: to re-think our priorities as human beings. This is not to reject the consumption of material goods, because that would be some absurd rejection of our basic existence as material beings in this world: we obviously need air, water, food to survive. However, the more poignant challenge is to draw a limit to what we truly need. This is where the compromise lies: not to reject our existence as human beings, but rather to understand that even though we may like to acquire material things, this should not be our ultimate aim. When we live in a society that through constant commercials, marketing campaigns, etc., tells us to consume, it is not a “platitude”, as Prager puts it, to reject this stance: it is rather a bold, almost revolutionary position, to challenge the dominant social normativities that tend to destroy the meaning of values that even Prager acknowledges should be ranked above materialism and consumption.

In the end, it is all about context: to argue in favor of material things, as Prager does, in a culture that is already materialistic, that is already obsessed with money, and has lost its spiritual center, is essentially to argue in favor of this reversal of values. On the opposite end, to argue against the acquisition of material things in such a context is not to reject our need for material objects, as Prager sees it, but is rather a compelling gesture to force us to re-think our priorities, our values, and what we truly need as human beings.

References

Prager, Dennis. “Opinion: In defense of acquiring material things.” The Jewish Journal, December 22, 2011. Accessed at: http://www.jewishjournal.com/dennis_prager/article/in_defense_of_acquiring_material_things_20111221.