Back in the 1940s an influential psychologist by the name of Abraham Maslow developed what he coined the “hierarchy of human needs” — which ordered the needs of man from most basic to most advanced. Most often visualized in the form of a pyramid, this hierarchy was ordered, from the bottom to the top, as such: Tier One, Physiological (breathing, food, water, sex, sleep, etc.), Tier Two: Safety (health, family, employment), Tier Three: Love/Belonging (friendship, family, intimacy), Tier Four: Esteem (self-esteem, confidence, achievement, respect) and Self-Actualization (morality, creativity, problem solving, lack of prejudice and acceptance of facts). What this all meant, Maslow argued, was that human’s couldn’t advance to the next tier of human development until the lower tiers had been satisfied. As such, the top priority for any person is to get food and water, and only once that need has been satisfied will they start to focus on safety — and then love, esteem and, finally, self-actualization.
This hierarchy has since become a foundation of modern psychology never changing in it’s simplicity and elegance. Never changed until, well, now.
Yep, Maslow’s pyramid has just been revamped by a team of researchers from the University of Minnesota and the University of British Columbia, Vancouver. In their new version, discussed in detail in a new paper published in Perspectives on Psychological Sciences, the research team largely left the first four tiers alone, instead focusing their updates to the top of the pyramid. Now, in the place of self-actualization (which has been entirely cut from the pyramid) sits three new tiers: mate acquisition, mate retention and, at the very top, parenting. That’s right, parenting is now considered the apex of human behavioral needs — that is to have children and to raise them to an age and development level in which they can then do the same.
As to self-actualization, these researchers argue that it’s characteristics (e.g. creativity and ethical behavioral) are actually just methods to meeting the needs of both mate acquisition and mate retention, and that it’s not an end unto itself.
What do you think, is pro creation and parenting the the culminating forces behind human biology and psychology? Or did Maslow have it right all along?





Comments
Anonymous
August 31st, 2010 - 8:25:09 PM
I don't know if I totally agree with the new one. I mean if parenting is only focused on after the other needs below are met, then why do poor people have so many children. On the contrary, it seems those with higher levels of income and education tend to have less children and in later years of life then those who are living in poor conditions. Even looking at the poorest people like those starving tribes in Africa that barely have water and food, yet they still procreate.
1
princessmom
August 31st, 2010 - 10:17:04 PM
I need to see more evidence of this it sounds fishy. I don't think it is universal like the original.
2
Psalm1:3
September 2nd, 2010 - 9:10:50 PM
I don't really care what the 'psychologists' think - I go by the Bible's instructions - born of the body, and re-born of the spirit. #1 need: Jesus Christ. He takes care of all the rest!
3
Reidun
September 16th, 2010 - 1:23:16 PM
If sex is on the first tier, then parenting, as a direct result of sex, shouldn't be on the top tier.
4
Mama Sare
September 26th, 2010 - 7:03:49 AM
I find that this version does not fit the tiered format at all, which was to show that most poeple do not advance to the tier above without the needs below being met. It is more universal for people to take on finding mates and procreating at any level in Maslow's actual hierarchy. And how does this even apply to people who devote themselves to a celibate life or who cannot/ do not have children? This seems like a ridiculous Utopian view of what should be in place before becoming parents, which is not what Maslow's Hierarchy was meant to explain!
5
Add your comment