Beyond hedonic adaptation?

[Gerard]

Is there a word for what happens when people get so adapted to a luxury-like thing that its absence becomes a problem for them? Aside from obvious labels like "princess"? I just can't understand the people I see posting on home sites, for example, who say "I could never live in less than 3000 square feet!" Why not? Are you very very big?

[dragoncar]

Snob

[121 Seconds]

Self Focus-Disorder (SFD)

I imagine these people are the same type that don't like camping much.

[tuyop]

In many cases, it's a matter of identity. Some people perceive a lot of value from being a person who just cannot do without something. Like, you want me to drink coffee from the Hotel? No. Nothing less than Starbucks for me! I am a connoisseur!

There are lots of things like this though, think of people you know who would just die without TSN, or their station wagon, or whatever silly consumer good they've decided to make part of their identity.


i think it's very sad, really. Imagine being so anonymous and confused that the most powerful advocacy for value comes from advertising agencies, and living in a vacuous echo chamber of bullshit from all of your friends as well.

[N.]

Overheard once at the office:

"Ugh. This colour is so... Tuesday. I'm booking a pedi and colour-change at lunch. And you know, Holt Renfrew is having a door-crasher. We should totally go. And did you see Mary in finance? She's wearing that awful dress again. With those horrible shoes. Gawd... borrrrrrrrring. I could never do without my Sunday shopping days. Everrrrrrrrrrrr. Who wears the same thing year after year?! Gross. Oh, hi Nat. I didn't see you standing there. We were just talking about going shopping after work. The new Michael Kors Spring collection just hit."

*blink, blink*

"Uh, ummm. K."

Awkward moment.

[velocistar237]

Is there a word for what happens when people get so adapted to a luxury-like thing that its absence becomes a problem for them?

My first thought was connoisseur, but snob fits better.

[totoro]

I like the "are you really really big"...

I think frame of reference is interesting here. 

I have this syndrome big-time with things like flush toilets.  I also like running water - a lot.  I'm a big big fan of the bubble bath.  Electricity does it for me too.

How do I know this for sure?    I once bought a remote island lot with my best friend with the idea of building a getaway cabin.  After staying in my neighbour's cabin, I realized it was way too rustic for me for more than a week.  I did not enjoy starting the generator or the spiders in my bed.

Also, I don't really like camping - although I used to.  I now like nature if it comes with a cabin with running water at the end of the day.

So, I suppose this is hedonic adaptation.  I could do without if I had to, but no way will I choose this for everyday living.  BTW, I kinda feel the same about my in-house washer/dryer and dishwasher.

My theory is that it is usually easy to go up on the luxuries, and harder to come down, but personality gets in there too.  Some people are more internal - others more external. 

The original question might have more to do with things that are more consumer-driven luxury items like fancy cars and houses, but where do you draw that line?  Is it whether something that truly makes life easierm and saves time vs. being a status symbol/consumeristic type thing?

[marty998]

1st world problems.

We have a name for it. It's called being a wanker.

Sometimes with all the cost of living whinging that goes on here I think the word for this sort of behavior is "Australian". Then the patriot in me reminds myself it's not everyone, it's just the muppet talkback radio hosts.

[Rural]

I have this syndrome big-time with things like flush toilets.  I also like running water - a lot.  .

Having just gotten both in my new house, a working flush toilet only a week ago, I'll second,this, big time. I know very well it's perfectly possible to do without-- heck, there a spring just down the mountain -- but I choose not to.

The original question might have more to do with things that are more consumer-driven luxury items like fancy cars and houses, but where do you draw that line?  Is it whether something that truly makes life easierm and saves time vs. being a status symbol/consumeristic type thing?

I'll add refrigeration, which implies either power or a regular supply of propane (we're going the power route). I've lived without it on extended camping trips, which isn't bad, but then camping is supposed to be different. I've also spent two weeks without in a normal house. Much less tolerable.

[happy]

Another vote for "wanker."

I agree with Totoro its much easier to adapt up than down....and most people are swimming around in the consumerist cesspool with no   insight that all this desire ("can't do without my X") is quite far from the truth.

At what point something becomes frivolous or ridiculous is hard to define..and yes I think it probably depends on the individual. I'm a camper and rustic cottages are no problem to me. I used to stay on an undeveloped plot of land in the mountains - when there was nothing we camped and carried water: then there was running water and a stinky outdoor toilet so we used them. Then there was a big shed with 3 sides, so we put the tent up in the shed since there was a clean floor and shelter from wind and rain. Then the shed was done so we stayed in there, but with limited fiddly access to solar power and hot water etc etc. I remembered the days of camping with fondness.....nothing stopping us from doing that again, but we never did/do since the shed is there.

When you start to deconstruct a lot of things we do/have in a Western consumerist society are quite ridiculous and frivolous, although seemingly not excessive. I'm thinking body adornment eg nail polish, piercings, tattoos, makeup, hair dye....but note body adornment is part of traditional cultures also: any anthropologists (Grant?) care to weigh in on the discussion?

[Jamesqf]

I have this syndrome big-time with things like flush toilets.

Yeah, but how about electrically-heated toilet seats?

[velocistar237]

Is there a word for what happens when people get so adapted to a luxury-like thing that its absence becomes a problem for them?

Incapable, dependent wimp.

Noun
luxury (plural luxuries)

• very wealthy and comfortable surroundings.
• something desirable but expensive.
• something very pleasant but not really needed in life.

I'm surprised that any definition of "luxury" would lack the word "need."

[totoro]

I have this syndrome big-time with things like flush toilets.

Yeah, but how about electrically-heated toilet seats?

Nope.  I had one when I lived in Japan and it always felt like it was still warm from a butt other than my own.  See, some of this is probably knowing your comfort zone and when to push it.

[DocCyane]

I call it "affluenza" because to me it is a disease when enough is never enough.

[tuyop]

I like the "are you really really big"...

I think frame of reference is interesting here. 

I have this syndrome big-time with things like flush toilets.  I also like running water - a lot.  I'm a big big fan of the bubble bath.  Electricity does it for me too.

How do I know this for sure?    I once bought a remote island lot with my best friend with the idea of building a getaway cabin.  After staying in my neighbour's cabin, I realized it was way too rustic for me for more than a week.  I did not enjoy starting the generator or the spiders in my bed.

Also, I don't really like camping - although I used to.  I now like nature if it comes with a cabin with running water at the end of the day.

So, I suppose this is hedonic adaptation.  I could do without if I had to, but no way will I choose this for everyday living.  BTW, I kinda feel the same about my in-house washer/dryer and dishwasher.

My theory is that it is usually easy to go up on the luxuries, and harder to come down, but personality gets in there too.  Some people are more internal - others more external. 

The original question might have more to do with things that are more consumer-driven luxury items like fancy cars and houses, but where do you draw that line?  Is it whether something that truly makes life easierm and saves time vs. being a status symbol/consumeristic type thing?

This is really depressing. You should look at those things and figure out if they really make you happy. I mean, you're really just a slave to your modern luxuries if you need them to achieve a baseline of happiness.

I've spent a lot of time in austere conditions, hiking the Appalachian trail with <20 pounds of gear including food, working in the military with no sleep or shelter, portaging and sleeping in improvised shelters on canoe trips, et cetera. Those are the times that I remember as being the most joyous and peaceful moments in my life. In those moments, when you realize that all that you need to live indefinitely weighs about ten pounds and can fit in a three gallon sack, you are truly free.

I agree that running water, hot water, and the like are convenient and make some things more comfortable, but flushing the toilet or washing my body really don't bring me any joy, and I would be suspicious if they did.

[capital]

I have a lot of great memories of bike touring while living in a tent, sleeping on a half-inch thick piece of foam, pissing in the woods, sweating so much that my clothes were covered in salt stains. But I am also remember being very glad to be living in a house again, with regular access to a warm shower, kitchen, and city full of other human beings.

Our ancestors fought like hell to build us a civilization with this level of comfort, and, while it's very nice to visit the woods and countryside, I'm glad it's not where I'll be living my whole life. Can you imagine living a whole winter without heating? I did it in San Diego, but wouldn't want to do it anywhere else in this country. And there's no way the large number of humans we have on this earth could survive without modern plumbing. Even bicycles and modern backpacking equipment wouldn't exist without an extensive, elaborate supply chain for all the metals and technical fabrics and so on.

[projekt]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOEIRI5HSuQ

"Nothing But Flowers" by The Talking Heads

[GuitarStv]

I like the "are you really really big"...

I think frame of reference is interesting here. 

I have this syndrome big-time with things like flush toilets.  I also like running water - a lot.  I'm a big big fan of the bubble bath.  Electricity does it for me too.

How do I know this for sure?    I once bought a remote island lot with my best friend with the idea of building a getaway cabin.  After staying in my neighbour's cabin, I realized it was way too rustic for me for more than a week.  I did not enjoy starting the generator or the spiders in my bed.

Also, I don't really like camping - although I used to.  I now like nature if it comes with a cabin with running water at the end of the day.

So, I suppose this is hedonic adaptation.  I could do without if I had to, but no way will I choose this for everyday living.  BTW, I kinda feel the same about my in-house washer/dryer and dishwasher.

My theory is that it is usually easy to go up on the luxuries, and harder to come down, but personality gets in there too.  Some people are more internal - others more external. 

The original question might have more to do with things that are more consumer-driven luxury items like fancy cars and houses, but where do you draw that line?  Is it whether something that truly makes life easierm and saves time vs. being a status symbol/consumeristic type thing?

This is really depressing. You should look at those things and figure out if they really make you happy. I mean, you're really just a slave to your modern luxuries if you need them to achieve a baseline of happiness.

I've spent a lot of time in austere conditions, hiking the Appalachian trail with <20 pounds of gear including food, working in the military with no sleep or shelter, portaging and sleeping in improvised shelters on canoe trips, et cetera. Those are the times that I remember as being the most joyous and peaceful moments in my life. In those moments, when you realize that all that you need to live indefinitely weighs about ten pounds and can fit in a three gallon sack, you are truly free.

I agree that running water, hot water, and the like are convenient and make some things more comfortable, but flushing the toilet or washing my body really don't bring me any joy, and I would be suspicious if they did.

See . . . I find it depressing that you can't take joy in a hot shower!  As someone who likes camping quite a bit, I have to admit that pooping in the woods is uncomfortable at best.  It doesn't mean I can't enjoy going out in the woods for a trip, or that I can't deal with cold water, wet and stormy camp nights, etc.  It just means that I find joy in sleeping on a regular basis without bugs crawling on me.

:P

[tuyop]

I have a lot of great memories of bike touring while living in a tent, sleeping on a half-inch thick piece of foam, pissing in the woods, sweating so much that my clothes were covered in salt stains. But I am also remember being very glad to be living in a house again, with regular access to a warm shower, kitchen, and city full of other human beings.

Our ancestors fought like hell to build us a civilization with this level of comfort, and, while it's very nice to visit the woods and countryside, I'm glad it's not where I'll be living my whole life. Can you imagine living a whole winter without heating? I did it in San Diego, but wouldn't want to do it anywhere else in this country. And there's no way the large number of humans we have on this earth could survive without modern plumbing. Even bicycles and modern backpacking equipment wouldn't exist without an extensive, elaborate supply chain for all the metals and technical fabrics and so on.

Debatable, but not the point.

My point is that you shouldn't need anything to produce happiness, because searching for happiness in external things puts you on the treadmill of hedonic adaptation.

Even living in the forest under a pile of debris won't protect you from misery if you don't understand hedonic adaptation. You'll think you'd be SO MUCH happier if you just had a lean-to and a fire. So you build those, and you feel great. BUT, then you'd be SO MUCH happier if you just had an animal skin, so you get one. BUT...

That person is just as pitiful as the person who just can't do without her Keurig or SUV or even bubble baths or whatever, because they're doomed to a life of trying to get happiness from the next new external geegaw.

[mobilisinmobili]

I just concern myself with being happy for myself and not worrying too much about what others are doing.

Because most of it is ridiculous.

[mushroom]

I mean, you're really just a slave to your modern luxuries if you need them to achieve a baseline of happiness.

I've spent a lot of time in austere conditions, hiking the Appalachian trail with <20 pounds of gear including food, working in the military with no sleep or shelter, portaging and sleeping in improvised shelters on canoe trips, et cetera. Those are the times that I remember as being the most joyous and peaceful moments in my life. In those moments, when you realize that all that you need to live indefinitely weighs about ten pounds and can fit in a three gallon sack, you are truly free.

I agree that running water, hot water, and the like are convenient and make some things more comfortable, but flushing the toilet or washing my body really don't bring me any joy, and I would be suspicious if they did.

My point is that you shouldn't need anything to produce happiness, because searching for happiness in external things puts you on the treadmill of hedonic adaptation.

Even living in the forest under a pile of debris won't protect you from misery if you don't understand hedonic adaptation. You'll think you'd be SO MUCH happier if you just had a lean-to and a fire. So you build those, and you feel great. BUT, then you'd be SO MUCH happier if you just had an animal skin, so you get one. BUT...

That person is just as pitiful as the person who just can't do without her Keurig or SUV or even bubble baths or whatever, because they're doomed to a life of trying to get happiness from the next new external geegaw.

I think you're taking it a bit far to say that *any* external object should not be a source of happiness. To take your example to an extreme, are you going to say that having enough food or water shouldn't be an external source of happiness? Would you prefer to be alone out in the desert dying of thirst? I don't think most people would be very happy in that situation. You need to satisfy Maslow's lowest level of hierarchy of needs (food, water, shelter, warmth) first. From what I understand of Buddhism, maybe you're talking about striving for supreme non-attachment, or maybe if you're Gandhi you can detach yourself from food for long periods at a time, but at some point most people need *some* external things to be happy.

Punishments like solitary confinement sound horrific. Maybe some stoic and truly self-reliant people could do ok in that situation, but I think I would crack. I need sunlight. I'm an introvert, but I like seeing people every once in a while, and if everyone else on the planet died I'd be devastated and probably start talking to my volleyball Wilson. And I don't want to make it a goal of mine to eschew *all* external things. I like having my husband around, and he is a source of happiness to me - sure, I suppose I could live without him, but I don't want to strive to make him not a source of happiness just because he's external.

Conversely, I do think it's important to cultivate internal sources of happiness, not rely too much on other's people's opinions/seeking others' approval, etc. but I think it's impossible to get rid of *all* external sources of happiness, nor do I think that should be a goal. Loving at least a few others/feeling loved in return, having enough water to drink and food to eat, seeing some sunlight...why shouldn't those be sources of happiness? I would add that in your example, you felt extremely joyful in a beautiful, natural setting. I love hiking and the outdoors because I find the beauty of nature and wildlife to be a source of happiness, and I'm guessing you feel the same. I doubt you would have had those same feelings of happiness if you had been forced to stay in a dark concrete room with your same supplies for the same period of time. Does that mean you should be "suspicious" if being in nature gives you joy?

[capital]

Know what'd make me pretty unhappy? Typhoid. Same for hypothermia. So I'm pretty happy to have access to plumbing and a warm clothes and bedding. I could probably make do with out them, but I certainly am happy I don't need to.

The other side to the "I don't need x!" coin is that people often use it to argue that it's alright if the lowest in our society lack practical access to those things.

[totoro]

I like the "are you really really big"...

I think frame of reference is interesting here. 

I have this syndrome big-time with things like flush toilets.  I also like running water - a lot.  I'm a big big fan of the bubble bath.  Electricity does it for me too.

How do I know this for sure?    I once bought a remote island lot with my best friend with the idea of building a getaway cabin.  After staying in my neighbour's cabin, I realized it was way too rustic for me for more than a week.  I did not enjoy starting the generator or the spiders in my bed.

Also, I don't really like camping - although I used to.  I now like nature if it comes with a cabin with running water at the end of the day.

So, I suppose this is hedonic adaptation.  I could do without if I had to, but no way will I choose this for everyday living.  BTW, I kinda feel the same about my in-house washer/dryer and dishwasher.

My theory is that it is usually easy to go up on the luxuries, and harder to come down, but personality gets in there too.  Some people are more internal - others more external. 

The original question might have more to do with things that are more consumer-driven luxury items like fancy cars and houses, but where do you draw that line?  Is it whether something that truly makes life easierm and saves time vs. being a status symbol/consumeristic type thing?

This is really depressing. You should look at those things and figure out if they really make you happy. I mean, you're really just a slave to your modern luxuries if you need them to achieve a baseline of happiness.

I've spent a lot of time in austere conditions, hiking the Appalachian trail with <20 pounds of gear including food, working in the military with no sleep or shelter, portaging and sleeping in improvised shelters on canoe trips, et cetera. Those are the times that I remember as being the most joyous and peaceful moments in my life. In those moments, when you realize that all that you need to live indefinitely weighs about ten pounds and can fit in a three gallon sack, you are truly free.

I agree that running water, hot water, and the like are convenient and make some things more comfortable, but flushing the toilet or washing my body really don't bring me any joy, and I would be suspicious if they did.

Sorry to depress you further, but I have tested my reality and flush toilets make me really really happy.  I appreciate them, I truly do.  As for running water, that is bliss - especially hot and cold.  Could I live without them?  Yes, but they do make me enjoy my day more.  And yes, I have had extensive periods of time without these things while in third world countries.  I would work more to have them. 

I have a friend who is married to a man from India.  He can't understand camping at all.  His view is why would anyone ever do without running water and good sanitation voluntarily.  Growing up in India, the consequences of this were very visible and did contribute to unhappiness re. disease and disorder.

Do I feel enslaved?  No.  I'm pretty darn happy and enjoy the blessings in my life... like my fridge and stove - along with good health and family.

On the other hand,  I could not care less about cars, boats, or typical designer or luxury items like ultra-expensive kitchens.  They do not make me happier. 

[StarswirlTheMustached]

I think there's a point to both sides of the debate, here, in my understanding of stoic philosophy. The ideal stoic sage does not require external luxuries to maintain his (or her!) equilibrium. At the same time, he is not going to disdain these things.

The true sage could do without running water, sanitation, etc-- and, yes, even get typhus as a result!-- and not be made unhappy thereby. At the same time, the true sage will be able to keep in mind the value of a modern toilet and receive supreme joy with every flush.

So I feel like totoro and tuyop are both missing one half of the stoic ideal, which is, I believe, the best frame of reference from which to approach this conversation.