Wednesday, January 7, 2009

The Word For The Street Bible




Let's start with this question: Is the quality of life is related to what one has or what one is?


remember that the mass media are engaged in bombarding us with images to convince us that life is: increasingly take home, car, clothes, travel and all that is possible to dream. to the brand of soap you use, "it apart as a person. The idea of \u200b\u200b "coseismic" is clearly fueled by those who produce and sell things. But reality sometimes makes us doubt that happiness: Millionaires and celebrities who commit suicide, take drugs, get drunk ...


So is it true that money can not buy happiness?
Those who say that, remember that often folk tale, about the king who sought the man's shirt and wear it happily discovered that the only happiness he found ... he had no shirt. Of course this story so often repeated that they have a few shirts. Both positions
bother me much: the "coseismic", better known as consumption, because it alienates the person through ownership of things. And also the "pobrismo" (Apology to poverty), it seems to me hypocritical and manipulative. In short, do not think the money nor do I think of happiness in the happiness of man without shirt.


Everyone deserves a decent material life. Moreover, it is almost a prerequisite for people to enjoy other needs less land, because hungry and homeless, for example, is hard to concentrate on reading a good book.

These considerations lead us to differentiate the concepts of living and quality of life.
The living is a socio-economic category, which evaluated in terms of material goods and services available to the public as well as quality in their distribution.
Meanwhile, quality of life, Sico-psychological category, which refers to the subjective well people feel, in terms of meeting their needs.

Image Source:

0 comments:

Post a Comment