The revamp of Maslow's pyramid reflects new findings and theory from fields like neuroscience, developmental psychology and evolutionary psychology, ... it missed out on some very basic facts about human nature, facts which weren't well understood in Maslow's time, but were established by later research and theory at the interface of psychology, biology and anthropology ... big changes are at the top. Perhaps the most controversial modification is that self-actualization no longer appears on the pyramid at all. At the top of the new pyramid are three evolutionarily critical motives that Maslow overlooked -- mate acquisition, mate retention and parenting
This is the revised version of Maslow's pyramid of needs. (Credit: Doug Kenrick, Arizona State University)
The controversy lies with the (ideological?) contest between the old and the new which comes out in what we make of 'self actualisation', in short:
many of the activities that Maslow labeled as self-actualizing (artistic creativity, for example) reflect more biologically basic drives to gain status, which in turn serves the goal of attracting mates.I'm not yet convinced that this is 'the' right explanation (I'm comfortable that it could be part of it, but in complex dynamical system, with emergent properties such as a socialised human being, the reductionism sits ill, I think).
The other thing to change is that the new pyramid is seen as networked rather than hierarchy. This I'm almost entirely comfortable with in principle: I think that networks do seem to be more 'ultimate' in our universe than hierarchies. This means that it is more natural for the model to capture the insight and common criticism of the original model:
needs overlap one another and coexist, instead of completely replacing each other. For example, certain environmental cues can make them come back.Anyway, the authors appear to be looking for further discussion to fine tune it.
No comments:
Post a Comment