Psyblog explains the psychological reasons why material possessions can be so dissatisfying in the long term, as opposed to experiential purchases like concert tickets or a meal out, which often seem to even appreciate in value in our minds as time passes.

The article also explains how one can learn to be more content with those material possessions we do end up buying (in spite of our better knowledge): by thinking of them in experiential terms.

By thinking experientially we can make more of what we already have and ward off the invidious comparisons that can make the treadmill of consumer culture so unsatisfying.

Six psychological reasons consumer culture is so unsatisfying.

Andy Thomason (1993):

When Emile Durkeim conducted his statistical analysis of suicides in 1897, not only did he help establish the sociological perspective and the science of sociology, he also touched on what many consider the bane of modernity, and what may be the inevitable result of civilization and human’s attempts to dominate the earth and our environment.

Durkheim discovered that men, the wealthy, the unmarried, and Protestants were more likely to commit suicide than Catholics, Jews, the married, or the poor. He found that high suicide rates were inversely proportional to the degree of social integration of a particular demographic group. In other words, the more individualistic and autonomous a group a person belonged to, the greater the chance of the individuals in that group had of committing suicide.

Further studies have confirmed his findings. Higher suicide rates correspond directly with the loss of cultural identity associated with greater affluence and autonomy.

Durkeim attributed this phenomenon with a breakdown of social bonds, mores, and moral guidance resulting from the increased individualism a rise in prestige and affluence affords. He termed the condition “anomie.” In later studies he examined the role of anomie in other sociol ills such as deviance and criminality.

Pioneering psychologist Carl Rogers stated in 1955 that Persons are constituted through socio-historical and cultural processes. Since then, many other theories have emerged–from symbolic interaction to social self and deviance theories–that all say basically the same thing with slightly different emphasis. Our “selfs”, our identities are forged by our culture.

Social bonds certainly existed with greater strength in pre-industrial societies, but the anomie described by Durkeim began with our first tentative step toward civilization, when initial, albeit minuscule, breaks with our tribe and the erosion of our tribal identity started.

Movement toward modernity has increased the number of choices individuals have, but traditional, tribal people have a more well defined personal identity. As civilization and industrialization increase social ties weaken, and as those ties weaken it becomes increasingly difficult to form an identity or connection to anything larger than ourselves.

In their own language, all the terms that traditional, tribal people use to refer to themselves mean literally “human” or “human being” and define what it means to be part of the tribe and what it meant to be a human being.

Tribal identity defines and locates an individual within itself and within the larger context of the world, nature and even the supernatural, gives human beings and the individual a place in the world, providing a framework in which humans can depend on to interact with each other and the natural environment. Tribes defined our relationships, forged social bonds, identities, and commitments, and gave the individuals a sense of security, continuance, and well-being.

Read more (Tribal Identity and Loss of Self @ suite101)