| Another powerful contention for the advantages of materialism is one that is relatively new, and more socially-focused; it would make little logical sense to someone that lived before the late 1980s. The forthcoming assertion relies on the reader's basic knowledge and comprehension of urban culture, specifically rap music. The term "bling-bling" as it is used refers to the prominent display of ones personal wealth through "ice" (diamonds and/or platinum), 22s (automotive wheels with a diameter of 22 inches), and of course, excessive use of the word "phat" (similar to the slang definition of cool, but more emphatic). To be a star of any significance in this genre, one must "bling-bling" it as much as possible through the purchase and prominent exhibition of said "bling-bling." Even simply showing desire to attain these goods is acceptable, [why? to whom?] Look, I don't want to seem racially biased, but the answer to her question is 'Black people'... as long as one can rap about it to a catchy, bass-driven beat, but those without the gear and lacking the desire to achieve are known as "scrubs." See (or listen to) TLC's "No Scrubs," form the critically and commercially acclaimed album Fanmail. [Yet again...consequences?] You'd think she'd get it by now... My final point in favor [not arguing for favor - should be about ethical consequences] Oh, give it up... of materialism appeals to inherent human selfishness and relates to our currency itself. Long ago, this country (the United States) abandoned the gold standard, meaning that it had in reserves enough gold bullion to account for at least 40% of the money in circulation, and now it does not. What this means for us today is that the money you and I exchange for goods and services every day is in and of itself worthless; we obtain these products essentially free of charge. [Where does selfishness fit in here?] Hmm, the first sentence...oh, and that last sentence too... The obvious counter to that is in what way the money was obtained in the first place, or why there is still value attached to it. To address the latter first, the value of money is based on collective ignorance and trust (if this paper could not be shown to or discussed with many people, it would help to avoid having our entire economic system crumble). People claim that they put "blood, sweat, and tears" into that which they produce and that is indeed what money is based on. Sure, we can still sell blood, but the last time I cried really hard at the store clerk, I didn't get that pair of Nikes�. [This doesn't really make sense.] Did Shakespeare make sense? Did Swift make sense? Yes! And they sucked... To return to the first half of that statement, when one is on the receiving end of a monetary transaction, they [(line between 'they' and 'one') agree] Ok, my one fault in this paper so far... are essentially duped. Working for someone with the means to pay a salary seems to be quite popular these days, [Is this statement supposed to support something?] Yeah, ethical consequences. I mean, no... and there is certainly nothing wrong with that. One of the best ways to obtain money with little to no effort of one's own, however, is through an inheritance, where one is bequeathed a great deal of cash (or other holdings) and the supposed value it carries simply by being a friend or relative of the deceased. Certainly there is grief associated with the death of a loved one, but a few impulse purchases should take care of that. In summation, while materialism is a practice that is only occasionally beneficial to the individual, in a socialist-utopian sense, it will indubitably aid the collective economy of nearly any civilization, and let's face it, buying stuff is fun. Sure, you don't necessarily need a new DVD player, but isn't it shiny? Don't you care about your country's economic stability? Are you a Communist? She said nothing about this line. Dammit. End of Paper comments: "Lucas, As I was reading your paper I had to keep asking, What does this have to do with the ethical consequences of materialism? You don't say... You largely failed to answer the prompt -I'd like to see you focus more on the assigned topic in the next paper. Additionally, there is little solid support and the issues you bring up don't appear to have much to do with each other - showing a lack of coherence. Again, I have to remind you that you are now writing for the academic discourse community, and the style and tone you have chosen is inneffectual in such a setting, especially in an essay that has a lack of depth and development." Well the academic discourse community better change, 'cause I sure as hell won't. Oh yeah, grade: F |
| And now, the thrilling conclusion... |