Quote:
Originally Posted by Yukon Cornelius
Sleepy, your arguing samantics now. My idea behind what I said is that I try really hard to blow off popular items until it is virtually required that I have them (forced to swallow my pride) and used the cellular phone as an example and also gave you a time frame. It doesnt mean i had sleepless night and cold sweats over a freakin leash.
|
I'm not arguing semantics. For one it's spelled semantics; the second letter is e. Secondly, arguing semantics would be arguing over specifically over linguistic development or the relationships between signs. By definition I have not argued semantics until just now. Open a book once in awhile.
Now onto the actual argument. You're still not answering my question. Your average person doesn't have "sleepless nights and cold sweats" over these popular items. They still place a good deal of
value in them, that's why it's materialistic. You've taken a stance against these items, which is refusing to purchase them until it's necessary. That is placing, or rather specifically not placing,
value in them. Which is anti-materialistic. Aside from one stance being a negative and the other a positive, at its heart, how are you any different? It can't be that difficult to address this question.