Comments on: Wealth is not neutral

By: Technological wisdom of the elders | Love of All Wisdom

Technological wisdom of the elders | Love of All Wisdom — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 22:02:30 +0000

[...] their gratitude, their ability to appreciate technology. I worry that I’m on a technological hedonic treadmill: I’m surrounded by so much technology that my expectations higher, and it doesn’t make [...]

By: Reflections on the ethics of Santa | Love of All Wisdom

Reflections on the ethics of Santa | Love of All Wisdom — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:03:47 +0000

[...] second objection is close to my heart, since I’m enthusiastic about Buddhist critiques of wealth. The objection would seem to apply not merely to the Santa myth, but to Christmas gift-giving in [...]

By: Amod Lele

Amod Lele — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:45:01 +0000

Great to see you on the blog, Paula, and sorry for the delayed reply! Yes, I’ve seen that conclusion as well, and it also fits my current experience – my friends now can afford to do more than my grad-school peers could, which also makes a similar amount of income seem much smaller. My Indian relatives would be astonished at the large size of my current apartment, which seems small to me and my fiancée.

By: Amod Lele

Amod Lele — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:41:05 +0000

Hi Justin – yes, I think that I am trying to disentangle the two here. And I’m not sure whether the effort succeeds. More rumination required…

By: Paula Chambers

Paula Chambers — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 16:48:53 +0000

There was a fantastic article a couple years ago in The New Yorker magazine about *relative* poverty–the subjective feeling that one is “poor” based on a comparison that we inevitably make to what others appear to have. I highly recommend looking it up because it really enhanced my own understanding of wealth and poverty. Very interested subject. Thank you Amod.

By: Amod Lele

Amod Lele — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 03:37:07 +0000

True. Even relatively poor people in our society have the kind of luxuries (imported spices, warm baths) that once were the province of kings.

By: Ted Bagley

Ted Bagley — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 02:26:45 +0000

Our comments seem to show how “democratized” wealth is now compared to the time of the suttas.

By: Amod Lele

Amod Lele — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:14:10 +0000

Not necessarily. Śāntideva certainly wouldn't think so: for him, when we think in terms of responsibility to actions, it leads us to assigning blame, and thence to anger and hate. He's got a point, at the least, and may well be right. As for causation: I don't see how it's impossible for an external phenomenon to produce a mental state. Can a picture of a attractive woman or man not produce sexual desire? You hardly have to go as far as MacKinnon to think that it can.

By: Amod Lele

Amod Lele — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:09:25 +0000

Good points all around – to traditional Buddhists, a happy romantic life is not really different from material wealth. The Stoics would say the same – it’s all external goods. Is it really possible to meaningfully disentangle one from the other?

I’m wondering whether I should be thinking more about the point I made myself in my first post on external goods: deprivation can strengthen us, what doesn’t kill us makes us stronger. Maybe it’s important to take losses as opportunities to build our patient endurance.

By: Amod Lele

Amod Lele — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:01:59 +0000

Not a bad idea, Michael. Perhaps I need a period of genuine poverty to remind me how much I’ve got even now!