On Minimalism. Part 1 – Defining and Defending.

Every now and then I go through fads. In 2019 this usually occurred at the end of the semesters, during an examination period or at the time an assessment was due. One of those fads was minimalism. I listened to the The Minimalist’s podcast and also started watching Matt D’Avella. These things I really enjoyed and I actually was challenged a lot by them. My wife and I live in a small apartment but nevertheless, I looked around and saw that I had a lot of stuff that I didn’t need nor use. And ironically, I had lots of stuff I wanted to use but didn’t have the opportunity to use because I had all these other things that I wanted to use but I simply had too much to use which meant I couldn’t use things that I owned in the first place! What a strange and weird situation to be in. So quite aside from Marie Kondo’s fad that was sparking joy all around me at the time, I took up minimalism, oblivious to the growing trend around me. The only thing with this fad is that it’s stuck with me ever since. 

Following is the definition of minimalism proposed by the world/TED Talk-famous minimalists Joshua and Ryan who collectively are known as simply “The Minimalists”. 

“Minimalism is a lifestyle that helps people question what things add value to their lives. By clearing the clutter from life’s path, we can all make room for the most important aspects of life: health, relationships, passion, growth, and contribution.” – Joshua Fields Millburn & Ryan Nicodemus

I like this definition, but if I had to distil it yet, I’d say that at the heart of minimalism is “thoughtful consumption”. And of course, if you want to understand what something is then understanding its opposite is very helpful. Simply put, minimalism is the opposite of thoughtless consumerism. Josh and Ryan call it a lifestyle, but personally, I think it more of a mindset. And the key to that mindset is thoughtfulness, or another way of putting it, intentionality.

Much of modern materialism and modern consumerism is based on thoughtless consumption which is fuelled by advertisements producing a felt need in you. This decades-long systemic approach to business certainly doesn’t leave us in a neutral position. We will be on the back foot if we think it is a neutral position that we occupy and make decisions from. Lots of people are spending lots of money to get lots of aimlessly wandering eyeballs on their products. Meaning, without intentionality on the part of the consumer, they will also get your money. And so minimalism isn’t to be framed as seeking a negative goal, owning less, but is to be framed as seeking a positive goal, thoughtful and intentional consumption. 

One criticism that is brought against the minimalism movement is that apparently, only (or mostly) young white men who are single and rich consider themselves its devoted adherents. Now I don’t know if this is true or not because I haven’t looked at the whole of its demographic, but I see what that criticism is getting at (and I also suspect it’s true). But the truth or validity of minimalism is not primarily due to its adherents but rather in its statements. There is a place for judging a philosophy or framework by the people who implement it because then you see the real-world effects of it. Nevertheless, criticism of a framework should primarily be levelled at it’s propositions and stated values before it’s workings. Of course, the majority of make-up users are women, but that says nothing about the value of make-up (it’s only good for half the population). So it is with minimalism. 

The fact that minimalism is not a universal ethical norm which will benefit all society the world over doesn’t necessarily negate its value either. The particular usefulness of a tool to a person will depend on that person and their needs. There will be few people who need to adhere to the strict pharmacological regime prescribed for a congenital skin problem, except for those with the congenital skin problem. The same applies to the pharmacological regime prescribed to those suffering from type II diabetes. Only those with type II diabetes are going to need the pharmacological intervention, but the key difference in this analogy is that there are growing numbers of those with type II diabetes. And that’s because of thoughtless consumption, particularly of food.

So think of minimalism as a diet. The intentional and thoughtful consumption of goods for the health of the consumer. Of course, not everyone needs to be on this diet because not everyone suffers from thoughtless consumerism. Yet just as there are growing numbers who suffer from type II diabetes do to their unhealthy life, so there are growing numbers who suffer from materialism. That was the case for me. My unhealthy materialism needed to be addressed, so simply put, minimalism help me address it. Perhaps you’re in the same position…