argument map for The Lure of Luxury by 0823 WSL

central arguement

wsl0823wsl — 2024-09-29 18:49:31 UTC

The central thesis of Paul Bloom is based on the question of why people are willing to buy luxuries. By giving out counterarguments and disagreeing with two theories of "aesthetic appeal" and "social signaling" from previous scholars, he argued that luxuries' appeal extends beyond their sensory pleasures and signaling value. However, it is deeply rooted in the history and intrinsic property of the object. As he said "It arises because of the importance we give to the
deeper nature of things, what they are made of, where they come from. We are not empiricists, obsessed with appearance. Rather, the surfaces of things are significant largely because they reflect an object’s deeper nature." (Bloom, page 8)He states that people love luxury because of their deeper attributes for the object which contributes to peoples' appreciation and the unique pleasure that the item may provide.

Perspective 1: Sensory and Aesthetic Appeal (Virginia Postrel’s Argument)

wsl0823wsl — 2024-09-29 19:38:21 UTC

People buy luxury goods because they provide immediate pleasure and fulfill their aesthetic pursuits. People enjoy luxury because of their beauty and high quality. Luxuries are also appealing because they provide positive emotional senses.

Perspective 2: Social Signaling and Status (Geoffrey Miller’s Argument)

wsl0823wsl — 2024-09-29 19:47:26 UTC

This perspective is proposed by Geoffrey Miller and is called "The Signaling Theory". Because signaling theory can be applied to a lot of other fields, Bloom only provided claims and evidence to illustrate Miller's applications for this theory to the question of ”Why people buy luxuries". According to Miller, people buy luxuries because luxuries can act as signals and will allow them to "signal their attractive traits-such as intelligence, ambition and power".（Bloom, page 3) Luxuries can also show the social standing and status of a person. (inspired by Charles Darwin's sexual selection and Veblen's conspicuous consumption.)

Perspective 3: Historical and Intrinsic Value (Paul Bloom’s Argument)

wsl0823wsl — 2024-09-29 20:24:28 UTC

Extending further from signaling, showing status, aesthetics, and sensory, the writer suggests that people buy luxuries for some deeply rooted reasons such as the history of an object which makes them meaningful to their owners.

key words

wsl0823wsl — 2024-09-30 01:14:24 UTC

Pleasure:

In the article, pleasure refers to the sense of accomplishment and satisfaction when people buy luxuries or get what they want.

aesthetic

something that consumers consider beautiful, could serve to show a greater purpose (culture, personality, etc.), a broad term for how you express yourself.

high quality

This refers to those good fabrics and materials used to make luxury products.

key words

wsl0823wsl — 2024-09-30 01:15:44 UTC

status

your position of power over someone else, not only in society but in ownership: shows that our happiness is exquisitely sensitive to relative status.

positional goods

goods that project exclusivity and distinguish their owners from others by placing them into a select or favored group.

conspicuous consumption

expenditure on or consumption of luxuries on a lavish scale in an attempt to enhance one's prestige.

key words

wsl0823wsl — 2024-09-30 01:16:30 UTC

endowment effect

People will likely value an object more if they put more effort into getting or picking it.

historical value

The history that the object has been through, such as the previous ownership of a celebrity.

Ikea effect

A theory drawn from studies that indicate people like something more if they build it themselves. Serving as a complemental theory to the endowment theory.

Primary Evidence

wsl0823wsl — 2024-09-30 01:32:07 UTC

1: The writer quotes Virginia Postrel's book The Substance of Style where she claims "our reaction to many consumer items is “immediate, perceptual, and emotional. We want these things because of the pleasure we get from looking at and interacting with high-quality products—and there is nothing wrong with this"(Bloom, page 2) To demonstrate that previous scholars have already studied this topic and have drawn some conclusions. Showing one of those conclusions, this quotation gives evidence of Postral's idea that people buy luxuries because they get pleasure from possessing high-quality goods.

Secondary evidence

wsl0823wsl — 2024-09-30 01:33:23 UTC

2: “An appreciation of beauty explains certain accessible and universal consumer pleasures" (Bloom, page 4). This quotation is one that Bloom uses to provide more information about Postrel's perspective. Differentiating from the one shown in the primary evidence, this piece of quotation focused on the aesthetic aspect that drives people to buy luxuries. It indicates that people sometimes buy luxuries only because they are good-looking and that appreciation will produce pleasure.

Primary Evidence

wsl0823wsl — 2024-09-30 01:41:43 UTC

1: Paul quoted a scientific study in the text saying "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, page3) to support his claim of signaling by saying people buy luxury to get praise and approval and will feel good when getting recognitions from others.

Secondary Evidence

wsl0823wsl — 2024-09-30 01:47:44 UTC

2:" Evolutionary psychologist Geoffrey Miller gives this theory an adaptationist twist, arguing that the hunger for these luxury goods is a modern expression of the evolved desire to signal attractive traits—such as intelligence, ambition, and power—to entice mates" (Bloom, page3)

With this quote, Paul states that buying luxuries for signaling and seeking potential mates could also be a reason.

Primary Evidence

wsl0823wsl — 2024-09-30 01:52:56 UTC

1: The writer used examples from common life and claimed that “You also value an object more if you purposefully chose it than if it was just handed to you. And you value it less if you had previously rejected it. You enjoy something to a greater degree if you had to work to get it” (Bloom, page 6)to explain more about the endowment effect. Supporting his claim that people value an object more because of the history that it carries.

Secondary Evidence

wsl0823wsl — 2024-09-30 01:59:07 UTC

2: By providing an example of "In a 1996 auction, President John. F. Kennedy's golf clubs sold for $772,550, and a tape measure from the Kennedy household sold for $48,875. There have been eBay auctions for Barack Obama’s half-eaten breakfast and Britney Spears’s chewed-up bubble gum"( Bloom, page 6) the writer argues that people will value an object and spend more on an object more if the are historically related to a celebrity. Providing more evidences for his "history theory" and introdued "celebrity fever" at the same time.

connections

wsl0823wsl — 2024-09-30 02:00:53 UTC

All perspectives acknowledge that luxury goods provide some form of value, whether through sensory pleasure (Postrel), status signaling (Miller), or historical significance (Bloom). Each perspective highlights different reasons why individuals derive pleasure or value from these goods.

disconnections: historical value vs. signaling

wsl0823wsl — 2024-09-30 02:06:02 UTC

historical value vs. signaling

If someone buys luxury for a historical value, the pleasure and value that the object brings will be mostly noticed by themselves since things such as a cup that a celebrity used could mean nothing to an unknown third person."Then there are more personal cases. Think about your wedding ring or your child’s baby shoes. Such objects serve no practical purpose, they need not be beautiful in any sensory way,
and they are useless as signals. Is anyone impressed by the fact that I own the original baby shoes of my two sons? World’s worst positional good!"(Bloom, page7) Meanwhile, if someone buys something because they want to signal others, they would choose something of obvious value so that others could also notice and make reactions. For example, "If my neighbor owns a fancy car and I want one but don’t have it, this will make her happy and me sad."(Bloom, Page9)

Counter arguments

wsl0823wsl — 2024-10-07 03:27:22 UTC

Bloom disagrees with both arguments from Miller and Postrel by saying that they are not complete in interpreting the reason people buy luxuries. For the sensory theory, he says that humans are not sensory creatures "I don’t think any of this is mistaken. But it is seriously incomplete. 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."(Bloom, page4) As for the signaling theory, he counters by saying "If such purchases are motivated by status
enhancement, they become positional goods: their value is determined by what other people possess. This inspires a powerful critique of consumerism. Status is a zero-sum game, and just as countries in a literal arms race have to strip away resources from domestic priorities (Bloom, page3) Without overall denying the previous theories, Bloom provided counterarguments by throwing out his own theory of "history theory" Sensory properties are relevant and so is signaling, but the pleasure we get from the right sort of history explains much of the lure of luxury items—and of more mundane consumer items as well" (Bloom, page4) which he believes discussed the topic from a more panorama view.