# data[].attributes.body
In this article, Bloom argues that purchasing luxury goods is not simply due to an act of signaling or sensory pleasure but rather due to the history of the item. Bloom states that we are not primarily sensory creatures but respond to what we believe obtain deeper properties including their histories; "There is a further explanation for our love of such goods, which draws upon one of the most interesting ideas in the cognitive sciences: that humans are not primarily sensory creatures. Rather, we respond to what we believe are objects’ deeper properties, including their histories"(Bloom 4). Bloom continues with the statement that we can be influenced by the history of an object even when it has nothing to do with communicating status or differences in quality. Bloom provides an example of the endowment effect-- when you come to value objects such as a mug more if you own it. You value it less if you previously had it and when you had previously rejected it. Bloom elaborates by stating that we enjoy something to a greater degree when we work for it a phenomenon known as the "Ikea effect". Bloom believes that these phenomena exist due to the history of an object.

# data[].attributes.body
"Advertisements are often pure signaling fantasies. Your neighbors gasp as your car drives by; the attractive stranger in a bar is aroused by your choice of beer; your spouse and children love you because you bought the right brand of frozen pizza."(Bloom 3) Signaling theory poses that people purchase items to exemplify social status, wealth, intelligence, power, and attractiveness. In other words, people will purchase goods to signal certain attributions. Consistent with this, neuroscience studies reveal that when people look at products they judge to be “cool,” brain areas associated with praise and social approval are activated." (Bloom 3). In this quote, Bloom confirms his belief that people use advertisements as a creative way to signal.

# data[].attributes.body
"Only a Philistine would deny Postrels point that some consumer preferences are aesthetic even sensual." (Bloom 4) Sensory theory posits that the enjoyment of objects is derived from the five senses (Sent, Touch, Smell, Hearing, and Taste). Bloom believes that although this can be true, the theory can be countered since there may be varying sensual experiences based on an object's value. An example of this is a sham Rolex, Although it is fake it still offers the same sensual experience a real Rolex offers.

# data[].attributes.body
Postrel quotes “People pet Armani clothes because the fabrics feel so good; Those clothes attract us as visual, tactile creatures, not because they are ‘rich in meaning’ but because they are rich in pleasure (Bloom 4-5)." Postrel argues that our reaction to many consumer items is “immediate, perceptual, and emotional. In Addition, Postrel extends his argument stating that we purchase things because of the pleasure we get by looking at and interacting with high-quality products. In Living it Up (2002), Twitchell’s daughter is captivated “not so she can impress anyone else or feel affiliated with prestigious brands; She wants these luxuries because they are aesthetically appealing, because they are, in a word, beautiful.” (Bloom 5) This quote further substantiates her claim that consumers purchase things due to pleasure rather than history or symbolic importance.

# data[].attributes.body
Economist Richard Layard argues that contemporary research shows that our happiness is "sensitive to relative status"(Bloom 9). To explain his argument, Layard provides an example stating that if his neighbor owns a fancy car and he wants one, his neighbor would gain happiness and in return, he would gain sadness. In other words Layard claims that there is a net Loss in when she makes her purchase. From Layards perspective envy is a form of pollution created by his neighbor's possessions.

# data[].attributes.body
Paul Bloom poses his central claim that the purchasing of luxury goods is not simply an act of pleasure but rather due to the history of the items. In addition, Bloom states that sensory and signaling properties are also relevant to the purchase of luxury goods, acknowledging the existence of both sensory and signaling theory. Bloom starts off his argument by questioning why people spend obscene amounts of money on luxury items instead of choosing more convenient and efficient items. Signaling theory is an important aspect of Bloom's article as it is a key perspective on why people purchase these goods. Signaling theory poses that people purchase items to exemplify their status, power, wealth, intelligence, power, and attractiveness. As stated bloom further confirms his belief in this theory by affirming that people use advertisements as signaling fantasies. On the contrary, Sensory theory poses that the enjoyment is derived from the five senses. Bloom believes that although this theory can be applied, there may be varying sensual experiences based on the value of an object. This perspective is built on the fact that luxury products may give a different sensual experience in comparison to a mainstream/more affordable product. 2 key arguments posed in Paul Bloom's "The Lure of Luxury" are Postrel and Miller. Postrel claims that our reaction to many consumer items is immediate, perceptual, and emotional exemplifying her belief in the sensory theory. Postrel elaborates by stating that people pet Armani clothes because the fabric feels so good. She also states that clothes attract us as visual, tactile creatures not because they are rich in pleasure, attacking the claims made by Bloom. Postrel claims that Twitchell's daughter wants luxuries because they are aesthetically pleasing and beautiful. To conclude posters points he believes that consumers purchase things due to sensual pleasure rather than history or symbolic importance. Another key argument opposed is Millers argument that the hunger for luxury goods is the modern expression of the evolved desire to signal attractive traits such as intelligence, ambition, and power. Miller is pro signaling theory as he is shown believing that people do purchase luxury in pursuit of social acceptance and idolization. In conclusion, although all three of these people are shown to have different perspectives and ideologies they all believe that sensory, and signaling are reasons for the purchasing of luxury goods.

# data[].attributes.body
"Thus the History of an object matters to the pleasure we get from it." (Bloom 6) According to Bloom, Consumers are more likely to buy something that has been touched by a physically attractive person. Celebrity influence is an example of this as many fans dream of obtaining the same objects as their favorite people. In addition to this in a 1996 auction, President John F Kennedy's golf clubs sold for $772,500 along with a tape measure for $48,875. It is clear that the history of these objects causes people to spend obscene amounts of money on them. Bloom continues by showing that there are more personal cases exemplifying the value of history. For instance a wedding ring or a child's baby shoes. There is no practical purpose to these objects however their value is determined by their history. They do not need to peak your senses or signal to others. Bloom concludes his ideology with the claim that "part of the lure is that we believe these items have a certain sort of history; The pleasure we get from these objects is genuine and aesthetic, not mostly sensory."(Bloom 8)

# data[].attributes.body
Will Wilkinson points out, that the available data suggests that citizens of countries with liberal free-market economics are satisfied, which explains why the United States is a place that exemplifies the consumerism that Layard and others worry about. Will says this to substantiate the fact that status and wealth aren't inherently connected. "Surfer dudes don't compete with Star Trek geeks for status" -- Many of Which has nothing to do with money."In the Continuation of Wills's argument, he states that there is psychological data suggesting status might not be the whole story. Will presents the example that one child enjoys a teddy bear doesn't seem to detract from his playmate's enjoyment of his own. The generalization that everyone's envy is activated due to another person's luxury goods is flawed. As shown in blooms article, some goods, including luxury goods are valued for properties that have nothing to do with what other people think.

# data[].attributes.body
"But Postrel is too quick to dismiss Twitchell's claim bout meaning (Bloom 5)." In context on page 4, Twitchell states that he sees the attraction of goods as rooted in self-image and personal identity. Twitchell believes that along with sensory theory, people are attracted to goods when they sense relatability and meaning in them. In relation to this quote, Bloom asks if shoppers would react the same way reaching into the discount rack at Marshalls. He asks this question because he believes that non-luxury consumer goods don't hold the same meaning as luxury goods.