Self-Actualization

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

Self Actualization

Abraham Maslow defined a hierarchy of needs to be:

  1. Biological and Physiological (water, food, shelter, air, sex, etc.)
  2. Safety (security, law and order, stability, etc.)
  3. Belonging and love (family, affection, community, etc.)
  4. Esteem (self-esteem, independence, prestige, achievement, etc.)
  5. Self-Actualization (self-fulfillment, personal growth, realizing personal potential, etc.)

This hierarchy makes us conscious of the obvious fact that we did not fret about the absence of self-esteem if we did not already have security nor did we worry about security if we did not have water to drink or air to breath.

“Maslow says there are two processes necessary for self-actualization: self exploration and action. The deeper the self exploration, the closer one comes to self-actualization.”

“A musician must make music, an artist must paint, a poet must write, if he is to be at peace with himself. What a man can be, he must be. This is the need we may call self-actualization … It refers to man’s desire for fulfillment, namely to the tendency for him to become actually in what he is potentially: to become everything that one is capable of becoming …”

I think that the area in which Western society fails most egregiously is in the matter of an intellectual life after schooling. We have a marvelous brain that goes into the attic after schooling is complete and is brought out only occasionally on the job or when we try to play bridge or chess.

It appears to me that the fundamental problem faced by most Western democracies is a lack of intellectual sophistication of the total population. Our colleges and universities have prepared young people to become good producers and consumers. The college graduate has a large specialized database that allows that individual to quickly enter the corporate world as a useful cog in the machine. The results display themselves in our thriving high standard of living, high technology corporate driven life styles.

We are excellent at instrumental rationality and deficient at developing the rationality and understanding required for determining normative values. It seems to me that our societies are not prepared intellectually for the demanding task ahead. The only solution seems to be a change that will significantly increase the intellectual sophistication of the society as a whole. We need a rising tide of intellectual sophistication and Self-Actualization might be the way for our adults to add an intellectual life to their acquisitions.

To get an idea about S-A you might examine performance-unlimited.com/samain.htm You can do a Google and find other sites that you might find more interesting.

2

Hey, just as a side note Maslow is considered to be an Adlerian in his approach!

I think that you make a good point about the mental development of people in the west, and I would especially say America. However, the problem isn’t with the people, but with the economic climate.

I’ve known a variety of people that are talented musically and artistically in my life. This talent seems strongest in the early twenties and then wanes as they get older. Actually, it’s not the talent that wanes but the practice of the talent.

The people in question, including myself, end up getting consumed with financial obligations, job satisfaction issues, and relationship struggles. For a period of about ten years I worked from 7:30 in the morning to 11:30 at night during the work week. At of this time was somehow spent on work related issues. I would read books on the toilet and in bed. On the weekends I would get together with my girlfriend at the time and go see a movie or something. I had produced zero artistic material, during this time, although I was always planning to.

Self-actualization gets squashed in our society because your survival is always being challenged by economics. Once you’ve taken care of business then it’s time for bed. Part of me thinks that this may be done on purpose to make sure that ingenious people don’t keep popping up to cause trouble.

To support that, I recall reading a quote from a Spanish general where he angrily stated that they should never have cleaned up the slums of Bilbao because all of the diseases kept people too sick to revolt. Now, “too sick” means too stressed and too depressed to do much. For even further support, check our consumption of sleep and psychiatric meds.

Over time I began to see this drive achieve a middle-class dream as being pointless. We are slaves to economics, basically the need to pay the bills, and this drive to achieve work related success is really just a performance for the rich people that you work for, in most cases. So, that’s what we end up doing, working to be perfect so that rich capitalists will have a smoother ride. Then, you get old and approach death having learned what?

Well, I’ve learned at 39 that I’m not going that route.

3

Adlerian, great reply - I am in a bad situation at the moment, economically, I think that the only way to keep your artistic and creative drive on full throttle is to embrace an element of poverty, or minialism, almost in a buddhistic.

'poverty is the spectre of genius- - Ginsberg.

Self-actualisation and creativity through poverty, sufferance and endurance…

4

I agree colinsign.

Unless you find that you are getting paid to create art of learn new things then you have to bite the bullet and make time to do what you need to. Ultimately, few give a shit about you anyway, so you must enjoy your life (along ethical lines, of course).

5

Good thread, Cobert. I’ve been a big fan of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs ever since I first saw it.

It’s true that many people don’t use their brains as much and as far as they should, but I think we need to concede that 1) many of the jobs and lifestyles in the current world don’t exactly strain the old grey matter, and 2) lots of people quite simply are brain-people.

6

The heirarchy of needs has been around for a loooong time and simply delineates the obvious. It is true that the affluent western societies have allowed the individual to ‘go to sleep’ as it were. Whether this is by design or by weakness of character is another question.

I would take exception to the notion that poverty is either desirable and/or necessary for personal self actualization. Obviously, those of us who are sitting in front of our computers enjoy a certain measure of affluence to even have the luxury of considering the question. Poverty is truly a powerful motivator, but it aims at survival, not contemplation of our intrinsic selves. Only affluence allows us self actualization, at least in the sense of our cultural training.

That said, there is a great deal of potential in carefully defining need -vs- want. Culturally, we seem to have gotten confused about the difference, but we must be careful, If everyone suddenly started asking what they need instead of what they want, the economic crash would be deafening…

A mind is a terrible thing to waste? Yes and no. Just how many poets, artists, artisans are enough?

I understand the observations though. I do what I do for me. To the extent anyone else sees or appreciates those things is interesting, but it is still about me. Self actualization isn’t about why I do, it is just my doing. Few enjoy the opportunity to find that and even fewer take advantage of that opportunity.

JT

7

“I would take exception to the notion that poverty is either desirable and/or necessary for personal self actualization.”

No, we were talking about when the world does not provide for your kind of talent. Will you work on the talent or get a job at the bank?

8

Adlerian writes:
[

And back we go the coberst’s kind post of heirarchial needs. Your talent or working at the bank? The answer is obvious: Food, clothing and shelter first, all else after. It doesn’t mean that you can’t pursue your talents, but you must take care of basic needs first. There are literally thousands of excellent musicians who make their living doing anything but making music. The same would go for any ‘talent’.

I suppose it would be ideal if a society could foster and nurture each individual’s talents, but it never has been, and probably never will be something available to any but the the most affluent of societies.

It seems almost schizophrenic, but even our paleolithic ancestors had to provide the basics before they were free to paint on cave walls.

Granted, in today’s society the layers of things to do, the energy expended in basic support activities, all seem disportional to individual life satisfaction, but we pay a price for everything.

Consider: the counter-culture communes that pop up every 2nd generation or so start with great vigor as each individual pursues their ‘talents’ and predispositions. All too quickly the wheels fall off their wagon as they discover that not enough people find gardening to be their thing and there isn’t quite enough to eat. The price of society is social support -ie- doing the mundane chores whether they are conducive to our talents or not.

Pursuing my doing doesn’t have to be supported by society. Rather, my doing is part of supporting that same society. It would be nice if my society would supply my needs while I pursue my talents, but very few have managed that position in any society and was always the product of hard work along with a healty dose of pure luck.

JT

9

Well sure, you must provide for basic needs and the word “basic” is the key feature. One can have the basics and get a lot of pleasure doing things that they enjoy in their spare time. Pursuing only the basics is what provides the spare time.

Schopenhaurer wrote quite a bit on the intelligent man’s need for free time to develop his mind. Of course, he was pretty wealthy, so he could afford free time. The poor, but intelligent man, does not have such resources and simply has to come to terms with that if he is to enjoy himself.

More and more I’m starting to see middle-class values as training as being a means to provide well-trained slaves, rather than as a means toward liberty.

10

Liberty? Who want’s liberty? I just wanna do what I do - every chance I can get in between scraping together a living for myself, and the city, and the state, and the federal government, and the thousands of marketers who depend on me…

JT

11

tentative,

You’ve reached Nirvana.

12

Who’s that? :wink:

JT

13

They were a band where the lead singer…

14

Band? I thought it was a choral group doin’ Gregorian chants or somethin’. I must have missed something…

JT

15

Even in some hypothetical Utopian economic system (which will never ever exist, btw) not 1 in 1000 people would ever attain “self actualization.” Few possess the drive, motivation or insight that such a thing requires.

Anyway, it’s foolish to blame the capitalist system we now have with preventing this. Closer to the truth would be that without “modern” economic systems, the very concept of self actualization wouldn’t exist. Think about it- 10,000 years ago, 95% of ones waking moments were spent trying to attain the first rung, simply basic survival. While animals living ‘close to the land’ may be more in touch with nature, and are said by some to live a ‘better’ life because if it, early humans would have had very little time for our current notions of living an examined life. Only when civilizations rose, with specializations, and agriculture emerged, were we free to create and distribute a surplus; only then could we start to forge the concepts of modern life that we know enjoy/labor under (depending upon you pov).

Granted, capitalism didn’t create this, per se, but only the “artificial” construct of civilization created the equally artificial concept of self actualization. We’re quick to point out the flaws and downsides of this civilization, but you can’t make an omellette without breaking a few eggs.

Besides, since we’re all dead in the long run, why particularly should self actualization be any more lofty goal than any other? No matter how your life is spent, the results are the same eventually.

16

Did you know that the average person in the US will gain 49,000 dollars in debt that they will never pay off?

Meanwhile, Qutar has cradle to grave housing, education, and healthcare.

17

Hi Phaedrus,

In a sincere attempt to try to re-build the thread’s original intent instead of destroying it, :unamused: (apologies, coberst) I think the real issue is the alienation of man from himself. For all the marvels and comforts of becoming civilized, how does one claim benefit when the result is to become a robotron in the well oiled machine. Coberst isn’t wrong to point out that much of modern life takes us away from ourselves rather than toward what is intrinsically our basic nature -ie- to pursue our selfish interests. Why do we assume hand-me-down lives from our society instead of creating our own lives from within?

It may be true that the end is the end, but it is the journey that is at issue.

JT

18

Well, my point is you can ‘create a life from within’ precisely because six thousand years worth of your ancestors did the heavy lifting for you. The whole concept of that would be alien if you lived in your “natural” state, ie as an animal.

I’m just saying there’s a tradeoff. Which way are we “better off”? I dunno. I think I like living past 30, still having teeth, and sleeping in my bed in my house instead of in a cave wrapped in an animal skin. We’ve lost that connection with nature, but we’ve gained Mozart, Plato & Einstein.

That’s not to say we can’t create a balance that would please us more. But the majority of people would probably live like robots under any social or economic system. How many people are truly awake to their lives anywhere?

19

Phaedrus,

Well, isn’t that the rub? Does society repress our abilities or enhance them? I think a good case could be made that we are inherently asleep by choice. But can it not be said that we are taught from our enculturation to not only be, but to remain asleep? How would one know which is which? But I think that coberst’s question goes beyond that, and asks what do we do with those who awaken? (coberst, I’m not trying to put words in your mouth) Given our social structure, how does one pursue that which is their advocations?

JT

20

Point taken. I guess it’s a circular argument. Our ancestors were probably very awake to the threat of cave bears and lions and tigers, but probably didn’t devote a lot of time to the arts and stuff. Well, except maybe ‘cave paintings’. :wink:

At the risk of repeating myself (and not necessarily saying civilization is always the cat’s pajamas) the very idea that there could be more to our “self” than eating, shitting and fucking probably derives from “modern” society. Perhaps we have a feeling that we’re missing something, but maybe we were always missing it and never realized it.

Ignorance/bliss?