//=ucwords($r1['title']);?> Our Mind Over Matter
OPINION I Economic Times
India’s population can be categorised into four socioeconomic groups: destitutes, aspirers, middleclass, and rich. PRICE findings reveal three attitudes: associating success with ownership,embracing simplicity, and showing indifference toward material wealth. These go beyondeconomic constraints and reflect deeper psychological and cultural nuances of how peoplenavigate materialism.
1. Material possessions
These serve as a symbol of success for many. But this sentiment variesbased on socioeconomic standing.
- Rich
36% equate owning more material possessions with success. Luxury items are seen astangible manifestations of affluence.
- Middle class
28% of the middle class also places value on material success. Their aspirationsrevolve around bridging the gap between necessity and luxury, driven by hopes for upwardmobility.
- Aspirers
This group shows slightly lower attachment to material success at 25%. Its focus issplit between ambition and navigating economic challenges.
- Destitutes
At 14%, this group is the least likely to tie success to possessions as their primaryconcerns revolve around meeting basic needs. Material accumulation often remains a distantgoal, and sense of success is tied to securing day-to-day stability rather than acquiring symbols ofwealth.
2. Simplicity and minimalism
These two factors emerge as dominant attitudes acrosssocioeconomic segments, resonating with 47% of the total population. Individuals with thismindset prioritise owning fewer possessions and lead simpler, more purposeful lives. While thisapproach aligns with broader societal trends toward mindfulness and sustainability, its underlyingmotivations vary across income levels.
- Rich
46% embrace simplicity. But their motivations are more intentional, driven by a desire toavoid excess and prioritise quality over quantity. This trend may reflect a growing awareness ofsustainability and burdens of over-consumption, as well as an attempt to distinguish themselves from mass consumerism.
- Middle class
With 47% identifying as minimalists, this segment strikes a balance betweenaspirations for a better lifestyle and a pragmatic approach to consumption. They seek to manageresources wisely, while focusing on what matters.
- Destitutes
60% express a preference for simplicity, likely as a necessity. Financial constraintsforce this group to focus on essentials, making minimalism an adaptive response to theircircumstances.
Across socioeconomic tiers, the rising embrace of minimalism signals a cultural shift towardsvaluing experiences, relationships and personal growth over the accumulation of goods. Thistrend highlights a growing awareness of social and environmental costs of material excess,emphasising ‘less is more’ as a guiding principle.
3. Indifference
Disregard for material goods represents a more neutral stance, with 29% of thepopulation subscribing to this perspective. The indifferent neither strive for more possessions norintentionally limit them, choosing, instead, to adapt their consumption based on their needs andcircumstances.
- Rich
Indifference is less common, with only 18% subscribing to this attitude. For the affluent,their ability to curate their possessions intentionally reduces the likelihood of viewing materialgoods with neutrality.
- Middle class
This segment also shows a notable degree of indifference, with 26% adoptingthis outlook. This group may face pressures to upgrade lifestyles, but appears to avoid becomingoverly attached to possessions. This reflects a willingness to adjust buying habits based onsituational demands.
- Aspirers
31% express indifference, as they balance financial realities with aspirations. Forthem, possessions may be more about practicality than symbolism, fulfilling immediate needs,rather than reflecting status or success.
- Destitutes
26% demonstrate indifference toward possessions, which may reflect a pragmaticapproach rooted in survival. Material goods are often function al, underscoring adaptability ofindividuals in lower economic tiers where the focus is on utility rather than accumulation ordeliberate minimalism.
Association of success with ownership reflects aspirational nature of wealth, particularly amonghigher-income groups. Rise of minimalism highlights a growing shift in cultural values towardsustainability, mindfulness and intentional living. Meanwhile, prevalence of indifference among certain segments reveals a flexible, needs-based approach to materialism.
For businesses and policymakers, understanding these attitudes is vital. Companies targeting therich may benefit from emphasising exclusivity, quality and intentional ownership. Thoseappealing to the middle class should focus on affordable products that balance utility withaspiration. Initiatives promoting simplicity and sustainability can resonate across allsocioeconomic groups, especially as societal values continue to shift toward reducing excess andprioritising non-material forms of fulfilment.
Ultimately, these attitudes demonstrate that materialism is not a one-size-fits-all concept. Instead,individuals navigate their relationship with possessions in ways that align with their uniquecircumstances and priorities. By recognising these nuances, society can foster more inclusive andsustainable approaches to consumption and wealth, catering to diverse needs and values, whileaddressing the broader implications of material culture.