Maslow's hierarchy of needs

[Die Neue Zeit]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/06/karl-marx.htm

"History was for the first time placed on its real basis; the palpable but previously totally overlooked fact that men must first of all eat, drink, have shelter and clothing, and therefore must work, before they can fight for domination, pursue politics, religion, philosophy and so on — this palpable fact at last came into its historical rights." (Karl Marx)

How valid is applying Maslow's hierarchy of needs dynamically (as opposed to dialectically) (http://www.revleft.com/vb/new-materialism-dynamic-t80627/index.html) to Marxist analysis in the First World, especially the need to spread class consciousness to clerical and professional workers and overcome sectoral chauvinism?

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

This is all psychology, and so should be hived off the Science, I think.

[Hit The North]

I'm going to put it in Theory which is more inclusive than this forum.

On the o.p. I think Maslow's hierarchy of needs is a good way of showing how Capitalism cannot meet the higher needs of most individuals. It's instructive of the poverty of life for most of us in this rotten system.

[Holden Caulfield]

Maslows hierachy of needs or rather the work of Rogers in this field can be sided both with communsim and with capitalism with ease,

it is used the business world to boost production in a work force, and one could say capitalism allows one to more freely up the stages and to therefore self acctualise,

however we as communists would say that social constraints mean that only the wealthy/privaleged minority can reach their potential and that under communism, with egalitarian distribution of resources and facilities, everybody could and will be encouraged to reach their potential for the benafits of all

[Hit The North]

however we as communists would say that social constraints mean that only the wealthy/privaleged minority can reach their potential and that under communism, with egalitarian distribution of resources and facilities, everybody could and will be encouraged to reach their potential for the benafits of all
Exactly. I also like the way it's presented as a pyramid which could be imaginatively counterposed in a corresponding relation to the pyramidal class structure. Is there an identity between the folk at the top of each pyramid?

It's a nice device for thinking about the short-change life-chances of existing in an unequal society. It also obviously relates psychological wellbeing to material conditions which puts it, at least in spirit, in line with Marxism.

Does it have a scientific basis though?

[Holden Caulfield]

Does it have a scientific basis though?


no,
depending on your view of psychology the answer might be no as psychology isn't a science,
but i would say no as this seems to be from the humanist school of tought, which rejects scientific methods

[Joe Hill's Ghost]

I would say that it applies t communism much more. Even under capitalism the wealthy constrained by the capitalist mode of production. They can't fully self actualize as they can't engage in the same sort of undivision of labor that takes place in anarchist society. Only the extremely wealthy have the ability to do whatever they want and even then, it can't necessarily contradict the status quo. Otherwise they'd be denounced and kicked out of the ruling circle. Under communism the individual is free to pursue whatever sort of activity that makes them the most happy. Thus we proffer the greatest opportunity for self actualization.

[Holden Caulfield]

moving away from Maslow and towards Carl Rogers...

i think that Hegal's thoery of man wanting to destroy to be acknowledged (bla bla if you know it you know it if you dont PM me i cba writing it all down)

applies to self actualising for welthy capitalists and this is why it is this demographic that fill their head with helping donkey sanctuaries, shopping organic at M&S, and buying 'vintage' clothes,

this is because they cannot self actualise, due to the fact they opress; even if they are not aware of it their wealth is a unconscious burden upon them