Materialistic N??

[Moiety]

Yeah, if art counts as materialism I'm as materialistic as they come (except for the "collector's syndrome" part - I couldn't care less to have everything neatly stored around the house or even in good condition - unless it's a particular favorite of mine)

I'm.a.Diva

Can't access the video but something tells me I really shouldn't anyway


Btw Lexicon, I consider the "converse crew" materialistic too. I mean, if ya can't see yourself with another pair of shoes, it probably means you are more materialistic than you realize.

 

[speculative]

MBTI is just the function; it is not the "source." For the source I turn to the Enneagram. I am an SP, so I tend to hoard cash rather than spend it, for the purpose of security and having a cushion to fall back on should something happen. I am totally anti-knick-knack. I do not understand why people spend good money to fill their house up with clutter that does not fulfill any purpose. I have few "decorations" in my house except what I've received as gifts that I have to put up to be polite. I do have one painting that I have on the wall because it has sentimental value though. I usually save the money that would go towards such things and use it on big-ticket items instead, such as a big HDTV or something similar. (Though not in this economy. ) I do not need many things at all, but when I do need something (such as a car) I do need it to be nice...

 

[Kangirl]

I like to envision environments, y'know ... interior decorate in my head.

If I'm not careful, I can spend hours and hours doing this. It's almost a sickness.

Re: gadgets. For whatever reason, I do not covet gadgets, either. Or knick knacks.

 

[Riva]

Ns can be just as materialistic if not more.

Ns are symbolic so they might go shopping for clothes because of the way it makes them feel or the way it allows them to express themselves.
Ss are more likely to shop for clothes simply because they look good.

I know when I'm shopping for clothes I'm constantly asking myself "what does this say about me?"

same here.i can identify with this.

 

[simulatedworld]

MBTI is just the function; it is not the "source." For the source I turn to the Enneagram. I am an SP, so I tend to hoard cash rather than spend it, for the purpose of security and having a cushion to fall back on should something happen. I am totally anti-knick-knack. I do not understand why people spend good money to fill their house up with clutter that does not fulfill any purpose. I have few "decorations" in my house except what I've received as gifts that I have to put up to be polite. I do have one painting that I have on the wall because it has sentimental value though. I usually save the money that would go towards such things and use it on big-ticket items instead, such as a big HDTV or something similar. (Though not in this economy. ) I do not need many things at all, but when I do need something (such as a car) I do need it to be nice...

Not that SPs can't be thrifty (I know some who are), but your statement that "I am SP, therefore I tend to save money" doesn't really make sense because SP is the most the traditionally impulsive temperament. If anyone's inclined to save money more than anyone else, it's probably SJs.

Of course I'm sure you really are a thrifty SP; that's quite possible--just your logic seems to imply that SPs are more likely than other types to save money, and that's the opposite of what's actually true in temperament theory.

 

[Lexicon]

Btw Lexicon, I consider the "converse crew" materialistic too. I mean, if ya can't see yourself with another pair of shoes, it probably means you are more materialistic than you realize.

I never said I couldn't see myself with another pair of shoes.
Nor am I a member of any "crew.." though I can't say I blame you at all for including me in that generalization...

Seems like over the past decade more and more people find that particular brand fashionable.
I know a ton of people who wear 'em cuz all the cool kids do. :rolli:


I like my shoes, of course. But it wouldn't be some tragedy if they all disappeared and I had to pick a new type of shoe. The shopping part would be the biggest hassle for me personally (I go grocery shopping at 3am just to avoid people/get in & out as quickly as possible.. If I could order affordable groceries via the Internet, I would, but so far I can only do that with my clothing/sneakers). These are what I grew up wearing, and continue to buy because they're familiar/comfortable/inexpensive and I know they'll last me awhile. I realize they're quite popular, but that's never been the reason for me to have a preference for.. well, anything, I suppose.

In mentioning my one set of sneakers (along with a few other examples), I was mainly trying to further illustrate how I'm just not interested in/excited about the prospect of going out to stores, looking for new types of footwear or other 'stuff' in general. Why would I need to go out of my way to peruse stores & be totally uncomfortable, if I already have something reliable?



That aside, I'm well aware that no one, myself included, is exempt from a certain level of preference & attachment to material things, regardless of Type or motivation [associated social status, sentiment, nostalgia, etc]. I suppose it's more specifically just how much importance is placed on those personal possessions, compared to how much is placed on the other 'valuable' aspects of living, that would determine whether or not an individual could be deemed significantly material-oriented in life. If my silly little rant in my 1st post seemed to indicate I believed otherwise, that was definitely not my intent. It's a spectrum. I'm in there someplace, too. Wearin' my chucks.

 

[Moiety]

Thanks for the dissertation, but I was just messin' with ya. I know a lot of people who are "faithful" to their chucks and I was trying to turn the matter upside down. I understand what you mean(t), of course.

 

[Lexicon]

Thanks for the dissertation, but I was just messin' with ya. I know a lot of people who are "faithful" to their chucks and I was trying to turn the matter upside down. I understand what you mean(t), of course.

Bah.. I've got to stop overclarifying..

 

[SillySapienne]

I don't think I'll ever want to make a boyfriend's fingers n' toes purty..
And hopefully said hypothetical boyfriend won't resent me for this.

People messing with my feet is weird.
I don't think I want a guy I'm dating to be sanding off layers of dead tissue from my heels with a special rock.
Call me crazy, but I bet our relationship would still do remarkably well without having to explore that realm of intimacy.

Hahaha, I was referring more to a platonic/familial kind of love, (I give my sister and mother mani/pedis on occasion).

Random, yet related, (and definitely disturbing), sidenote: My father got manicures, (acrylic tips, to be exact), on a biweekly basis. Talk about -inducing!!!

Well.. I don't look at books/movies/music as just 'stuff'.. more to it than that. They're works of art that not only stir the senses, but are more likely to be inspirational/thought-provoking than say, a stamp collection.

Agreed, fuck with my book collection, and I'll kill you, fuck with my sticker collection, and I might slap you and shed a histrionic tear, but I'd definitely let you live!

Aw, no worries. Plastic dinosaurs are totally an exception.
Those aren't even really knick-knacks. They're more like.. inanimate friends.

They're the guardians of your tabletops/shelves!
Keeping the evil ceramic furry woodland creatures/cherubs/fairies at bay.

Precisely!!! Though, admittedly, I own more herbivore plastic dinosaur gatekeepers than carnivore ones, so they tend to befriend rather than end furry woodland creatures. Barry, my brontosaurus nearly died, last week, from the hemlock "gift" he received from some mischievous, up-to-no-good satyr named Steve, who lives, quite (in)appropriately in my lingerie drawer.