Maslow has a Problem

The first warning bells about Maslow’s hierarchy went off in my head when I allowed myself to reflect on people I had met when working in Zambia. The people I met on those trips lived hard lives, many getting by on not much more than $1 a day. Being honest about myself, if I had been faced with their challenges I would have fallen apart. They did not. They demonstrated lives filled with joy and meaning. They were not ignoring their hardships, they were finding meaning and joy in the midst of them.

If you have spent time in the developing world, then you may have had a similar experience. There is a culture shock and a challenge to the unconscious arrogance from which we form assumptions about what is required in order to live full meaningful lives. I’ve never considered myself to be very materialistic but faced with people who have so little I was challenged by how psychologically reliant I am on stuff.

Reflecting on these experiences I began to wonder if Maslow has got everything the wrong way round. That far from freeing us for higher things, having everything we need removes us from the stuff that really matters and disconnects us from the meaningfulness that is there in simply living day by day, moment by moment.

American Psychologist Abraham Maslow first proposed his now famous ‘hierarchy of needs’ in 1943. His basic theory is often summarized by the idea that the “deficiency needs” (physiological, safety, love/belonging, esteem) lower down the hierarchy must be satisfied in order to free the individual to pursue the “growth needs” of self-actualization. Maslow later clarified that this simplistic idea of upward progression through the hierarchy was not his intention but maintained the basic principle that satisfaction of the lower levels frees the individual to give more attention to the upper levels.

Maslow’s hierarchy is almost ubiquitous in the world of self-development. For many it is assumed to be well researched and true. Do a little digging and you will discover that Maslow based his theory on the analysis of a small sample of biographies; most of whom were of accomplished, relatively wealthy, white men. It is a theory rooted in a wide range of assumptions about the superiority of wealthy advanced nations.

Between 2005 and 2010 a research project sought to test Maslow’s theory in a way Maslow himself never did. With a sample of 60,865 people from 123 countries the research concluded that, if not met, the needs further down the hierarchy may demand attention but the existence of those needs does not prevent the pursuit and realization of the higher levels.[i]

In other words, Maslow’s hierarchy may accurately define the different types of need we experience, and it may have been successfully used as a motivational tool, but its underlying theory has been falsified.

When all you have is now

Viktor Frankl’s theories, and the experiences on which they were based, stand in stark contrast to Maslow’s ideas. Frankl was a Jewish-Austrian psychiatrist who experienced the horrors of Nazi concentration camps and from his experience rethought the principles of psychotherapy. His starting place is almost the exact opposite to that of Maslow. Frankl’s theories emerge from the experience of being stripped of everything except the moment in which you now live. A context in which none of Malsow’s lower-level needs were met. In the concentration camps of Nazi Germany the body underwent extreme deprivation and everything was done to remove any sense of safety, love, belonging or esteem.

Frankl’s experience in the concentration camps had taught him that everything we consider important can, all too quickly and brutally, be torn away. Even the spiritual and cultural traditions that so often provide meaning can be stripped from us. In the camps it even became impossible to live for the future. Freedom became an unimaginable goal and death a constant companion. Prisoners were left with a choice to live longing for the past or to find meaning in the present. Frankl observed that the former choice led to a loss of meaning and onwards to psychological and physical decline.[ii]

What I find most interesting about Frankl’s conclusions is that he did not seek to remedy this meaninglessness with a call to return to the old traditions. Nor did he seek to invent a new tradition. Instead, Frankl sought to hold onto the lesson he had learned in the camps – to create meaning in the present moment:[iii]

• By doing something that leads to meaningful achievement or accomplishment.
• By experiencing something that elicits in us a love for the world in which we find ourselves. Or by encountering someone who elicits a loving response. This may be a loved one or a stranger.
• By facing unavoidable suffering with an attitude that transforms tragedy into triumph (“when we are no longer able to change a situation… we are challenged to change ourselves”[iv]).

Reconnecting with meaningful survival

I find Frankl’s thinking compelling. He shows us a way to find meaning that is not contingent on life going well, on having roofs over our heads, food on our tables or even a future in which we can believe we can make a difference.

My challenge to myself and to you is to reconnect to a sense of meaning here and now. To realise that our value as individuals, and the value of those around us is not contingent on a past that is no longer with us, nor on the potential to make a difference in an imagined future that may never exist.

Now is the moment in which we can make a difference. How we turn up in this moment; what we do now; how we respond to what we are experiencing now; how we respond to the people we are encountering now; our attitude in this moment towards the things we cannot change. These are the most profound opportunities to live authentic meaningful lives.

The challenge is profoundly simple: live well, do no harm and, when you can, do good for others. Now is the only moment there is. I have come to call this meaningful survival and to believe that it is the essential underpinning for a life well lived.

About Ian Harrison:

Ian works with leaders and their teams around the UK supporting them to create great places to work.

He is the creator of Gratitude Mapping a tool being used by teams to strengthen connections, break down silos and build positive cultures where people feel valued.

Ian spent 19 years as the minister of churches in and around the West Midlands. He has sat on the board of charities, and for two years was part of the volunteer team that delivered TEDxBrum. He lives in Wolverhampton but at the weekend you’ll find him at Ewood Park watching Blackburn Rovers.

Ian is co-author of “The Enabling Manager” and contributed a chapter on identity to “Enabling Genius.”

[this article first published: www.growhouse-gb.com/maslow-has-a-problem]

[i] Tay, L., & Diener, E. (2011).?Needs and subjective well-being around the world.?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101?(2), 354-356.

[ii] Viktor E. Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning (Penguin, London, 2004) p.78-81

[iii] Viktor E. Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning (Penguin, London, 2004) p.115

[iv] Viktor E. Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning (Penguin, London, 2004) p.116