Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Internet Search
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Parent Support Forums
Parent Emeritus
High chair tyrants
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="SuZir" data-source="post: 624050" data-attributes="member: 14557"><p>Maslow's theory has been widely criticised partly for the things SoC touched in her post. When I was first taught Maslow's hierarchy of needs eons ago, I was also right away taught it is far from undisputed theory, but it is useful tool in marketing etc. Basically real life proves it wrong. Many of the most famous artwork, poetry etc. have been done by people, who have not secured basic needs. Still they undisputedly are interested about highest level needs like expressing themselves.</p><p></p><p>It is also not about people trying to fulfil higher level needs being 'in higher level of morality, consciousness' or anything like that. What Maslow meant was, that when you are hungry or afraid for your life, many tend to think less about ideologist goals and are focus more to more basic needs. That of course have been proved wrong by real life. If people would always be more worried about their safety than for example ideological goals, we would not have terrorists for example.</p><p></p><p>It is kind of lucky too, though we could of course well live without terrorists etc. Being able to focus to higher level goals even if fundamentals are not met allows some hope for our kids when they are in rock bottom. They may be able to have some interest in becoming sober etc. higher level goals even though they may be homeless, short of food and so on. Human beings are much more versatile than Maslow's theory gives us credit. And much less rationalistic.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="SuZir, post: 624050, member: 14557"] Maslow's theory has been widely criticised partly for the things SoC touched in her post. When I was first taught Maslow's hierarchy of needs eons ago, I was also right away taught it is far from undisputed theory, but it is useful tool in marketing etc. Basically real life proves it wrong. Many of the most famous artwork, poetry etc. have been done by people, who have not secured basic needs. Still they undisputedly are interested about highest level needs like expressing themselves. It is also not about people trying to fulfil higher level needs being 'in higher level of morality, consciousness' or anything like that. What Maslow meant was, that when you are hungry or afraid for your life, many tend to think less about ideologist goals and are focus more to more basic needs. That of course have been proved wrong by real life. If people would always be more worried about their safety than for example ideological goals, we would not have terrorists for example. It is kind of lucky too, though we could of course well live without terrorists etc. Being able to focus to higher level goals even if fundamentals are not met allows some hope for our kids when they are in rock bottom. They may be able to have some interest in becoming sober etc. higher level goals even though they may be homeless, short of food and so on. Human beings are much more versatile than Maslow's theory gives us credit. And much less rationalistic. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Parent Support Forums
Parent Emeritus
High chair tyrants
Top