Early studies of lifestyle focused on the analysis of the social structure and the relative status of individuals within it. A person differentiates himself from the social classes he considers to be lower than himself, and according to his desire to compete with the classes he considers to be higher, he has a specific “framework of life”, especially a fixed pattern of “conspicuous consumption”. He insisted that he would accept “competition” and advocated this perspective along with the concept of “competition”.
Max Weber regarded lifestyle as a hallmark of a hierarchical group closely linked to the dialectic of prestige perception. That is, lifestyle is the most prominent sign of social difference (even within the same social class), and it is especially a sign of the prestige that an individual thinks or wants to enjoy. is there.
It can be understood that this is a process of creating a lifestyle that works “vertically” and “horizontally”, and at the same time, it is an effect created by the lifestyle.
Here, lifestyles are created primarily in social practice and are inextricably linked to individual tastes, showing the basic points of the interrelationship between the structure of the field and the processes associated with habitus. It is a thing.
Lifestyle as a way of thinking
The approach of understanding lifestyle as a way of thinking has its origins in the realm of psychoanalysis. First, according to Alfred Adler, it means that a framework that develops early in life and guides individual values and behavioral principles will define a judgment system that will affect one’s behavior throughout life.
Later, especially in the work of Milton Roguish, Arnold Mitchell, and Lynn Karl, lifestyle analysis in the form of value analysis (profile) developed. As a result, we have come to the hypothesis that it is possible to find a model of various scales of values organized hierarchically so that different groups of people correspond to it.
Then Daniel Jankerovich and William Wells appeared, and their attitudes were analyzed from both sympathetic and diachronic perspectives and based on sociocultural trends in a given social context. We have moved to the so-called AIO approach, which considers (attitudes), interests, and opinions to be the basic components of a lifestyle.
This keeps in mind that sociocultural trends have an impact on both the dissemination of people’s different lifestyles and the emergence of interactions between different modes of thinking and behavior.
Lifestyle as a behavioral style
Lifestyle analysis as an outline of behavior is characterized by the fact that the level of behavior is not considered as a mere derivative of lifestyle, or at least as a secondary component, but as an essential element.
First, in this approach, Anthony Giddens and colleagues focused primarily on consumer behavior and viewed the products acquired as objects that represented the individual’s self-image and their view of their position in society in a material dimension.
This perspective was then expanded, focusing more comprehensively on the level of daily life, paying attention to the use of time, especially leisure, the interaction and behavior between the positive and daily aspects of choice. I have come to study the organizational processes of the structures that characterize the level of.
Finally, researchers such as Richard Jenkins and AJ Veil say that they set the dimension of analysis not in daily behavior, but in behavior that the recipient considers to be particularly meaningful and characteristic behavior. He proposed an approach to lifestyle.