Anyone who has ever taken a psychology class has heard of Abraham Maslow, the mind behind the Hierarchy of Meeds. Maslow’s Hierarchy has existed since 1943, and has become a widely accepted and taught psychological truth. I, however, have a fundamental disagreement with Mr. Maslow.
As shown in the image above, Maslow’s theory asserts that there are five levels of needs, and that one level cannot be reached without the prior fulfillment of the previous level. This means that, for example, one would never be able to be free from prejudice without first having secure employment or that one could not create art without first being healthy and confident. This is asinine. Emily Dickinson, Vincent Van Gogh, Pablo Picasso, Sylvia Plath, Kurt Cobain, Ludwig Van Beethoven, and Ernest Hemingway are just a few examples of artists whose work was in large part driven by poor health (mental or otherwise) or a lack of friendship, family, esteem, or confidence. In addition, art is frequently used by terminally ill patients as a form of self-expression, even as a coping mechanism. These people clearly have not fulfilled all of Maslow’s levels of need, but they are able to reach his final level near the ends of their lives through the creation of art. It is often said that those who are near death tend to reach a state of peace and clarity; is this not self-actualization, Mr. Maslow? Art is a reflection of humanity; to say that art cannot be created in circumstances that are less than ideal is to invalidate the experiences and creations of countless individuals who have turned their suffering into something beautiful.
As for lack of prejudice, some of the people who show the least prejudice are those who have nothing. Amidst racial tension and unrest in the Middle East, the impoverished children growing up in Pakistan have been shown to speak languages that no one in their family can understand. They learn these languages by playing with any child they meet on the street, blind to race, class, and all other factors that can bar interaction and breed prejudice among adults. Despite the fact that they have very little means to fulfill even the most basic needs, these children have achieved Maslow’s highest level.
In addition to all this, it’s ridiculous to state that someone who does not have secure health or finances cannot have morals, spontaneity, or the ability to accept facts; I honestly don’t believe that even needs to be argued.
So, while I can see where Maslow is coming from and the hierarchy he created can certainly be applied in many situations, I disagree with those who view it as universally true. To wholeheartedly agree with Maslow is to invalidate the human experience and reduce it to an equation of sorts. Each human can and will reach self-actualization in his own way; there is no list of things to accomplish or ladder climb. There’s no “x+y+z=the good life.” There is only humanity trying as best as we can to find make sense of our existence, to somehow universalize the way we view life, but in the end, we need to admit that we can’t. Every person is different and will find happiness in his own way, hierarchies be damned.
