Interesting story. I knew nothing of this about Maslow. To me, our predicament indicates a superiority of Native American culture. A circle is inherently superior to a pyramid, one representing sustainability and inclusiveness, the other power, crushing weight and elimination by abuse and extraction. One lifts, one discards. One recognizes the failure of an individual reflects on the whole culture, the other builds its progress on victims cast aside. I think the "Blackfoot way" is overall superior, not just different, and I am certain the individualism was alive and well, just not in a toxic way. What we call progress in western culture, we can easily see now, is grievous harm.
Self-transcendence lies in putting others before you, not a deliberate goal you can assign value to, and a society that strives for the common good is the ultimate goal to becoming human.
How many mass shootings do we need to witness to admit our society is deeply ill?
The tenets of socialism are sound, unfortunately conflated to communism which is also sound in principle, but with a weary history of abuse tarnishing the idea. Whatever the best intentions of any political system, its abuse creates a dreary record open for criticism and distortion. Here we have democracy, noble in principle, made toxic by the twisted notion that capitalism is freedom.
Although there is room to be individual, there is no ultimate freedom, because there is always responsibility to others. To think otherwise is sociopathic.
We need to learn to live as servants to the planet and find our higher meaning in being her caretaker and of the life on it, equally deserving and essential to our own well-being. Everything is here from the slow, deep wisdom of the universe. We know nothing, and would be well-served to recognize that. There's enough mystery to learn of here, until the sun expands and swallows us. That's the next evolution of Homo sapiens if we're to have a future. Wisdom, not technology.
This is one of the best things ever. I am going to cross-connect it with my 3,000 subscribers. I take the position that the most impactful thing that could happen would be to change our creation story, where we’d go from being rugged individualists to where we care about each other as much as we care about ourselves. People argue with me that we’re just talking about a story as if it is not something real. But the story we are in is the most basic thing that determines humanity’s behavior. This is such a good piece to explain that!
there is an extensive literature on research into universal basic needs, needs which remain constant over time and across cultures. Ian Gough has done a nice summary. Universal basic needs are both material (food, water, shelter, etc), and non-material ( leisure time, an acknowledged role in community, a voice in community decisions that affect one's life, freedom to express one's identity (however conceived), etc. Basic needs obviously need resources to satisfy, but they are all satiable. The non-material ones are the ones that provide the most life satisfaction, and thankfully, they do not require resources to satisfy, as they are psychological and social. The various risks we face are increasingly challenging these basic needs. An important part of degrowth is to ensure these basic needs are satisfied for everyone - within biophysical limits.
Crikey, yes. Maslow gets quoted by everyone from sociology undergrads through therapists, public health officers and on to business trainers: and that's been a very unhelpful thing. It's so horribly simplistic as a framework. Totally ethnocentric. If we can listen more, we'll find a lot of (authentically, not po-mo neo-trad) trad wisdom that we could learn from for our next and imperative shift. Here's a lovely book from anthropology - a landmark classic. Thanks for your thoughtfulness and work. https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9780822396123/html?lang=en
"I’m not trying to paint the Blackfoot way of life, or the way of life of Indigenous people, as superior to Western ways of knowing or living."
Oh, why not. Just go there.
I submit that our current emphasis on "individualism" is utterly dependent on the excess energy of fossil sunlight. And it carries with it the full burden of such a life-style — pollution, crowding, poverty, stratification, war.
Go back just 10,000 years. At that time, humans were completely interdependent, in tribes, clans, villages of up to 150 people or so.
The invention of grain agriculture gave humans the first opportunity to store more than one year's worth of food. This created hoarding, withholding, social stratification, hierarchy, capitalism, and money — and all that entails. This was the first time hominids experienced rulers.
Fast forward to the widespread adoption of coal. The village devolved to the extended family, with three or more generations living together in tenement slums, while the young went off to factories to work for money, and a tiny fraction of humans profited greatly.
Fast forward again to the widespread adoption of oil. That was the change that fully enabled modern individualism. And an even tinier fraction of humans went on to such unimaginable profits that now, just the *eight* richest people have more wealth than nearly four billion other people.
Yea, this is what "individualism" has bought us. Do you *really* think those eight individuals are smarter, braver, or more worthy or deserving than four billion others? No. It's simply winning the birth lottery.
As fossil sunlight goes into permanent, irrevocable decline, expect the human social unit to return to the tribe, as it has been for 99.97% of all hominid existence. I can't wait.
Oh my Gosh. Mr. Orsagh, not only Maslow, but you miss the point too. Whether we use a triangle or circle or square or whatever geometric form to portray a conceptualization of one or another culture, they all have central themes of orientation occurring in some manner of a step-wise fashion that may take place as a social maze, gauntlet, or peg board, that are not always visible to outsiders. Be it through competition, social positioning, familial pigeon holing, etc... Call it self-actualization, call it self-transcendence, call it Ancient Soul, New Age orientation, higher consciousness, Heaven, Nirvana, Happy hunting grounds, etc... there is a conceptual hierarchy to be found.
Georges Dumezil had his Tripartite Ideology, Christian Thomsen had his three age system, Darwin had is Evolutionary ideas, and very many people throughout history have created their own Taxonomies. Yours is just another flavor cast into a pudding you churned up and claim it to be different by offering it in chinaware instead of a paper cup. While your assertions claim to be more objective, by taking in a larger appreciation of a more expansive profile of the human condition, yet you fail to place humanity it is place of a larger ensemble of life forms existing in the village called Earth.
Let me start off simple for those who have forgotten basic ideas of science taught to them in childhood. Please note the obvious pattern your examination of Maslow has overlooked:
There are 3 large atomic particles called Protons- Neutrons- Electrons
There are 3 quarks with a 3 X 3 arrangement of flavors
Life as we know it occurs on the 3rd planet called Earth
The Earth is generally divided into Core- Mantle- Crust
From the single stranded RNA with a triplet code life then developed a double stranded DNA with a triplet code, followed by a triple stranded Collagen.
There are 3 domains of life: Bacteria- Archea- Eukaryotes
It is the 3rd domain from which we get the animal kingdom whose development relies on a formulation of 3 Germ layers: Endoderm- Mesoderm- Ectoderm
How about most people holding a pen or pencil with three fingers and ending a sentence with a period, question mark or exclamation point?
How about the 3 colors on street lights or the 3-colored flag, or the 3 divisions of the government?
How about 3 Olympic medals, the Win-Place-Show of horse racing, or 3 foundation stallions?
How about the evolution of naming with 3 names instead of 2 or 1? How about the three standard eating utensils as opposed to 2 chopsticks?
Whereas you offer an opinion about culture, about what is real, about the formative foundational patterns of the human mind, body and spirit in social circumstances, and yet you and millions of other people have overlooked a simple recurring pattern IN Culture staring you in the face. Is it Nature? Is
it nurture? I submit you're not ready to talk about the human psyche in the present social conditions because you, like Maslow, overlook a very simple pattern that we humans are immersed in.
Thanks, Matt, for this more in depth look at Maslow. While I have long been acquainted with the Hierarchy of Needs I have never probed further. Perhaps this was because it spoke of something fundamental to life as I knew it and (sadly) know it still.
To me it speaks of the deprivation that persists in our so-called civilisation which apparently can countenance increasing levels of want as the necessary price of progress. I am glad you described it as "incomplete" rather than 'flawed' as I think it contains a great truth about how in this inhuman culture too many are unable to find themselves or their relationship with others as they are too busy struggling to maintain their existence, a struggle that is often lost.
Self-actualisation always seemed to me to be about the flowering of the seed that grew, the growing awareness of a true self and the expression of it. How wonderful it would be if we valued children enough to make that the first task of childhood. That while as parents we were able to fulfil most of the preceding levels all that was required of children was to discover themselves. Had I had that level of care from society in my early years I think I would have been pretty well disposed towards that society from the off and eager to contribute my talents.
Perhaps the fault, if any, in this model is the way it has been seen as a temporal progression as much as self-developmental progression when in fact we have the precedent of indigenous people and the current ability (if we choose) to provide all but the final step to everyone from the beginning.
These values don't seem mutually exclusive to me, and I'd like to see more collectivism as well. I think it could enhance our personal development when so many of our needs are met and we're not always struggling to get by.
I worked at an Ashram for about a year, and there was a lot of collectivism. It was a really interesting experience, and had me questioning our built environment, and how we can fulfill our needs in a more collectivist way. When I worked there, I lived there half the time, and had my own room in a collective building with shared washrooms and living space. We were fed by the folks who performed their 'selfless service' in the kitchen, and all had roles to play.
The feeling of connectedness was so pleasant. Little things, like having a puzzle on the go in the living area of the building and seeing how it progressed, and stopping to put in a few pieces, as we came and went was neat.
Interesting story. I knew nothing of this about Maslow. To me, our predicament indicates a superiority of Native American culture. A circle is inherently superior to a pyramid, one representing sustainability and inclusiveness, the other power, crushing weight and elimination by abuse and extraction. One lifts, one discards. One recognizes the failure of an individual reflects on the whole culture, the other builds its progress on victims cast aside. I think the "Blackfoot way" is overall superior, not just different, and I am certain the individualism was alive and well, just not in a toxic way. What we call progress in western culture, we can easily see now, is grievous harm.
Self-transcendence lies in putting others before you, not a deliberate goal you can assign value to, and a society that strives for the common good is the ultimate goal to becoming human.
How many mass shootings do we need to witness to admit our society is deeply ill?
The tenets of socialism are sound, unfortunately conflated to communism which is also sound in principle, but with a weary history of abuse tarnishing the idea. Whatever the best intentions of any political system, its abuse creates a dreary record open for criticism and distortion. Here we have democracy, noble in principle, made toxic by the twisted notion that capitalism is freedom.
Although there is room to be individual, there is no ultimate freedom, because there is always responsibility to others. To think otherwise is sociopathic.
We need to learn to live as servants to the planet and find our higher meaning in being her caretaker and of the life on it, equally deserving and essential to our own well-being. Everything is here from the slow, deep wisdom of the universe. We know nothing, and would be well-served to recognize that. There's enough mystery to learn of here, until the sun expands and swallows us. That's the next evolution of Homo sapiens if we're to have a future. Wisdom, not technology.
Great essay, thanks.
This is such a clear evocation of fundamental truth. You are a rare voice that gives me chills from how I resonate with what you write.
This is one of the best things ever. I am going to cross-connect it with my 3,000 subscribers. I take the position that the most impactful thing that could happen would be to change our creation story, where we’d go from being rugged individualists to where we care about each other as much as we care about ourselves. People argue with me that we’re just talking about a story as if it is not something real. But the story we are in is the most basic thing that determines humanity’s behavior. This is such a good piece to explain that!
there is an extensive literature on research into universal basic needs, needs which remain constant over time and across cultures. Ian Gough has done a nice summary. Universal basic needs are both material (food, water, shelter, etc), and non-material ( leisure time, an acknowledged role in community, a voice in community decisions that affect one's life, freedom to express one's identity (however conceived), etc. Basic needs obviously need resources to satisfy, but they are all satiable. The non-material ones are the ones that provide the most life satisfaction, and thankfully, they do not require resources to satisfy, as they are psychological and social. The various risks we face are increasingly challenging these basic needs. An important part of degrowth is to ensure these basic needs are satisfied for everyone - within biophysical limits.
Crikey, yes. Maslow gets quoted by everyone from sociology undergrads through therapists, public health officers and on to business trainers: and that's been a very unhelpful thing. It's so horribly simplistic as a framework. Totally ethnocentric. If we can listen more, we'll find a lot of (authentically, not po-mo neo-trad) trad wisdom that we could learn from for our next and imperative shift. Here's a lovely book from anthropology - a landmark classic. Thanks for your thoughtfulness and work. https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9780822396123/html?lang=en
Here is an amazing account of Maslow’s time with the Blood Tribe in Blackfoot territory (Alberta). https://youtu.be/WTO34FLv5a8
Thanks for sharing this Jenny.
"I’m not trying to paint the Blackfoot way of life, or the way of life of Indigenous people, as superior to Western ways of knowing or living."
Oh, why not. Just go there.
I submit that our current emphasis on "individualism" is utterly dependent on the excess energy of fossil sunlight. And it carries with it the full burden of such a life-style — pollution, crowding, poverty, stratification, war.
Go back just 10,000 years. At that time, humans were completely interdependent, in tribes, clans, villages of up to 150 people or so.
The invention of grain agriculture gave humans the first opportunity to store more than one year's worth of food. This created hoarding, withholding, social stratification, hierarchy, capitalism, and money — and all that entails. This was the first time hominids experienced rulers.
Fast forward to the widespread adoption of coal. The village devolved to the extended family, with three or more generations living together in tenement slums, while the young went off to factories to work for money, and a tiny fraction of humans profited greatly.
Fast forward again to the widespread adoption of oil. That was the change that fully enabled modern individualism. And an even tinier fraction of humans went on to such unimaginable profits that now, just the *eight* richest people have more wealth than nearly four billion other people.
Yea, this is what "individualism" has bought us. Do you *really* think those eight individuals are smarter, braver, or more worthy or deserving than four billion others? No. It's simply winning the birth lottery.
As fossil sunlight goes into permanent, irrevocable decline, expect the human social unit to return to the tribe, as it has been for 99.97% of all hominid existence. I can't wait.
Oh my Gosh. Mr. Orsagh, not only Maslow, but you miss the point too. Whether we use a triangle or circle or square or whatever geometric form to portray a conceptualization of one or another culture, they all have central themes of orientation occurring in some manner of a step-wise fashion that may take place as a social maze, gauntlet, or peg board, that are not always visible to outsiders. Be it through competition, social positioning, familial pigeon holing, etc... Call it self-actualization, call it self-transcendence, call it Ancient Soul, New Age orientation, higher consciousness, Heaven, Nirvana, Happy hunting grounds, etc... there is a conceptual hierarchy to be found.
Georges Dumezil had his Tripartite Ideology, Christian Thomsen had his three age system, Darwin had is Evolutionary ideas, and very many people throughout history have created their own Taxonomies. Yours is just another flavor cast into a pudding you churned up and claim it to be different by offering it in chinaware instead of a paper cup. While your assertions claim to be more objective, by taking in a larger appreciation of a more expansive profile of the human condition, yet you fail to place humanity it is place of a larger ensemble of life forms existing in the village called Earth.
Let me start off simple for those who have forgotten basic ideas of science taught to them in childhood. Please note the obvious pattern your examination of Maslow has overlooked:
There are 3 large atomic particles called Protons- Neutrons- Electrons
There are 3 quarks with a 3 X 3 arrangement of flavors
Life as we know it occurs on the 3rd planet called Earth
The Earth is generally divided into Core- Mantle- Crust
From the single stranded RNA with a triplet code life then developed a double stranded DNA with a triplet code, followed by a triple stranded Collagen.
There are 3 domains of life: Bacteria- Archea- Eukaryotes
It is the 3rd domain from which we get the animal kingdom whose development relies on a formulation of 3 Germ layers: Endoderm- Mesoderm- Ectoderm
Permit me to fast-forward through numerous examples of threes to get to human anatomy, which is replete with patterns-of-three: https://www.lumen.luc.edu/lumen/meded/grossanatomy/threes.html
Shall we talk about the Triune brain?
Or the SOV (Subject- Object- Verb) in word order?
How about most people holding a pen or pencil with three fingers and ending a sentence with a period, question mark or exclamation point?
How about the 3 colors on street lights or the 3-colored flag, or the 3 divisions of the government?
How about 3 Olympic medals, the Win-Place-Show of horse racing, or 3 foundation stallions?
How about the evolution of naming with 3 names instead of 2 or 1? How about the three standard eating utensils as opposed to 2 chopsticks?
Whereas you offer an opinion about culture, about what is real, about the formative foundational patterns of the human mind, body and spirit in social circumstances, and yet you and millions of other people have overlooked a simple recurring pattern IN Culture staring you in the face. Is it Nature? Is
it nurture? I submit you're not ready to talk about the human psyche in the present social conditions because you, like Maslow, overlook a very simple pattern that we humans are immersed in.
Thanks, Matt, for this more in depth look at Maslow. While I have long been acquainted with the Hierarchy of Needs I have never probed further. Perhaps this was because it spoke of something fundamental to life as I knew it and (sadly) know it still.
To me it speaks of the deprivation that persists in our so-called civilisation which apparently can countenance increasing levels of want as the necessary price of progress. I am glad you described it as "incomplete" rather than 'flawed' as I think it contains a great truth about how in this inhuman culture too many are unable to find themselves or their relationship with others as they are too busy struggling to maintain their existence, a struggle that is often lost.
Self-actualisation always seemed to me to be about the flowering of the seed that grew, the growing awareness of a true self and the expression of it. How wonderful it would be if we valued children enough to make that the first task of childhood. That while as parents we were able to fulfil most of the preceding levels all that was required of children was to discover themselves. Had I had that level of care from society in my early years I think I would have been pretty well disposed towards that society from the off and eager to contribute my talents.
Perhaps the fault, if any, in this model is the way it has been seen as a temporal progression as much as self-developmental progression when in fact we have the precedent of indigenous people and the current ability (if we choose) to provide all but the final step to everyone from the beginning.
These values don't seem mutually exclusive to me, and I'd like to see more collectivism as well. I think it could enhance our personal development when so many of our needs are met and we're not always struggling to get by.
I worked at an Ashram for about a year, and there was a lot of collectivism. It was a really interesting experience, and had me questioning our built environment, and how we can fulfill our needs in a more collectivist way. When I worked there, I lived there half the time, and had my own room in a collective building with shared washrooms and living space. We were fed by the folks who performed their 'selfless service' in the kitchen, and all had roles to play.
The feeling of connectedness was so pleasant. Little things, like having a puzzle on the go in the living area of the building and seeing how it progressed, and stopping to put in a few pieces, as we came and went was neat.
Here's a post I wrote that was partially inspired by the experience of living there: https://ideasbigandwild.substack.com/p/a-new-dream-of-home?r=aex03
I hope I haven't been oversharing, Suzanne. I'm going to try to share a little less. We all have so much to read, I know...
Love this one Matt, thank you.
Really appreciate this update on a tired triangle! Thanks for opening a conversation about how including the collective can be a powerful way forward.