Maslow was inspired by a trip to the Blackfoot people in Canada… only to then fail to actually understand how their society works. Some very interesting stuff:
Thank you for sharing! I didn’t know anything about this, my knowledge of the whole story is just what your average therapist would know. I am looking forward to reading it.
I think it also speaks directly to your points about collective, social needs being primary vs a Eurocentric cultural view based on individual realization and linear personal progress. I hope you find it interesting.
Thank you so much for sharing! I don’t know how things are in other cultures, but where I am, I get a sense that the social connection is still not, at least not explicitly, given the place it deserves.
I think many people recognize the importance but like so much of society it’s bound up in systems of hierarchy, much like the pyramid.
I think Maslow is correct insofar as if you remove basic subsistence most people with start to get very nasty, very quickly. But that’s a result of system that explicitly uses greed to drive social cohesion and productivity.
Like the article I posted suggests, these needs aren’t hierarchical but interdependent. Maslow is presenting a model based on a certain system, not on human nature itself.
Social connections need to be nourished face to face, without the constant competition. The less we do that, the more we risk social atrophy. Modern options are often reduced to becoming either a hikikimori (which modem society subtly encourages), an alpha man, or a girl boss (which society encourages more explicitly).
Unfortunately the opposite solution is far more complicated to implement in any systemic way, that being learning to become less competitive and greedy.
And yet, mentalising is constrained to a subset of mental state possibilities, not the set of all mental states. That in and of itself, is interesting. Plus it’s really easy for a lot of us to do!
Equally, the idea that we theorize about what is going on in someone else’s mind is one idea about how we do it. The other side of that argument being that we simulate it. Although it’s not entirely improbable that different people have different ways they mentalise.
This was such a refreshingly insightful read. I'm so glad I stumbled across it.
I recently finished reading Hofstatder's I Am A Strange Loop and this perfectly complemented it. After all, the "self" is really just perception bent back on itself. When we apply this concept to sociality, it's almost obvious that we all require the ability to hold a (lower resolution) copy of another's "I" within our own, out of pure survival.
Turning outwards, away from survival of an individual and looking at survival of the species, this mechanism is also required. Neurons communicate with other neurons using local rules, and consciousness - necessary for survival - emerges. Brains communicate with other brains using local rules, and global consciousness - necessary for species survival - emerges.
Thank you and I am so glad this has provided food for thought. I am truly surprised how this ‘biological’ aspect of presence of others is overlooked - I count myself in there. We do tend to see sociality as a nice and important addition but not a survival need IMO. Thank you so much for reading Juliette, much appreciated.
My psychotherapy lecturers used to say, quite often. We are born alone and we die alone. I would increasingly aggravatedly respond we are not born alone. We are in fact born with an active biological exchange of oxygen with our mothers which will be cut as she simultaneously provided us with an antibody stuffed nutrition. So yes Maslow needs tempering with Winnicott and where the wisdom they got taught and wrote down comes from needs acknowledgement. E.g aeons of primary and elder care giving.
The pyramid was drawn by a consulting psychologist, not Maslow. Maslow allowed for needs to be partially met before other needs being sought after. He added self-transcendence as a 6th need later on. The info appears mid way through the following post.
Thank you! I didn’t mean to come down hard on Maslow but not sure if it comes across that way. Thank you for sharing the post and I will modify accordingly. All I really wanted to say is that many of us have that blind spot and it was a perfect illustration.
Hey! Indeed. The visual representation is missing, but the hierarchy is in the paper and corresponds to the pyramid as represented in the figure that used for this article.
This is so good, Ana! I just kept thinking, of course social connection is the baseline - do we even have a sense of self without others? Do we know who we are if we don’t have interactions to figure it out? Maybe a bit dramatic, it’s late. But loneliness is such a threat to our health that maybe it’s not too far-fetched to wonder.
I think you make an important point. We have probably underestimated the role of social relationships in development and wellbeing, and I agree that the classic interpretation of Maslow leaves sociality looking like an optional extra rather than something fundamental.
I do wonder, however, whether the problem is deeper than where social connection sits within the pyramid.
Perhaps the pyramid itself is the wrong model.
Biology rarely works through neat hierarchies. Sleep influences emotion. Nutrition alters cognition. Movement changes stress physiology. Belonging affects inflammation and autonomic regulation. Learning changes behaviour, which in turn reshapes relationships. These are not separate layers waiting for the one below to be completed; they are interacting systems.
I've been thinking instead about what I call the interostate—the organism's integrated internal state at any moment. That state emerges from many interacting conditions: nutrition, sleep and circadian rhythm, movement, relationships, kindness, gratitude, teaching and the wider environment. Together they determine how the child thinks, feels and behaves. Over time, repeated interostates become stable patterns of cognition and behaviour.
In that framework, social connection remains profoundly important, but not because it occupies the bottom of a hierarchy. Rather, it is one of the major determinants of the interostate, alongside the other biological and environmental conditions that continuously regulate the organism.
Perhaps the question is not which need comes first? Perhaps the better question is what conditions create the internal state from which healthy development emerges?
That seems to move us away from a hierarchy of needs towards a systems model of human development.
I think you make an important point. We have probably underestimated the role of social relationships in development and wellbeing, and I agree that the classic interpretation of Maslow leaves sociality looking like an optional extra rather than something fundamental.
I do wonder, however, whether the problem is deeper than where social connection sits within the pyramid.
Perhaps the pyramid itself is the wrong model.
Biology rarely works through neat hierarchies. Sleep influences emotion. Nutrition alters cognition. Movement changes stress physiology. Belonging affects inflammation and autonomic regulation. Learning changes behaviour, which in turn reshapes relationships. These are not separate layers waiting for the one below to be completed; they are interacting systems.
I've been thinking instead about what I call the interostate—the organism's integrated internal state at any moment. That state emerges from many interacting conditions: nutrition, sleep and circadian rhythm, movement, relationships, kindness, gratitude, teaching and the wider environment. Together they determine how the child thinks, feels and behaves. Over time, repeated interostates become stable patterns of cognition and behaviour.
In that framework, social connection remains profoundly important, but not because it occupies the bottom of a hierarchy. Rather, it is one of the major determinants of the interostate, alongside the other biological and environmental conditions that continuously regulate the organism.
Perhaps the question is not which need comes first? Perhaps the better question is what conditions create the internal state from which healthy development emerges?
That seems to move us away from a hierarchy of needs towards a systems model of human development.
This article was so interesting. I am a primary teacher and we non stop talk about allows hierarchy. I don’t think he was incorrect but it was definitely time to evolve his framework! I am going to be hanging the poster in my classroom <3
We are such evolved animals but because of our intellect we almost close off due to the fact that that everyone does have different mental states. The fear of ‘being judged’ We are all so individual that the only thing the connects us and makes us feel whole is community/ society.
Maslow was inspired by a trip to the Blackfoot people in Canada… only to then fail to actually understand how their society works. Some very interesting stuff:
https://anzswjournal.nz/anzsw/article/view/959/822
Thank you for sharing! I didn’t know anything about this, my knowledge of the whole story is just what your average therapist would know. I am looking forward to reading it.
I think it also speaks directly to your points about collective, social needs being primary vs a Eurocentric cultural view based on individual realization and linear personal progress. I hope you find it interesting.
Thank you so much for sharing! I don’t know how things are in other cultures, but where I am, I get a sense that the social connection is still not, at least not explicitly, given the place it deserves.
https://podcasts.apple.com/nz/podcast/making-contact/id73329762?i=1000722775444
You might really like Joseph Gone’s work.
I think many people recognize the importance but like so much of society it’s bound up in systems of hierarchy, much like the pyramid.
I think Maslow is correct insofar as if you remove basic subsistence most people with start to get very nasty, very quickly. But that’s a result of system that explicitly uses greed to drive social cohesion and productivity.
Like the article I posted suggests, these needs aren’t hierarchical but interdependent. Maslow is presenting a model based on a certain system, not on human nature itself.
Social connections need to be nourished face to face, without the constant competition. The less we do that, the more we risk social atrophy. Modern options are often reduced to becoming either a hikikimori (which modem society subtly encourages), an alpha man, or a girl boss (which society encourages more explicitly).
Unfortunately the opposite solution is far more complicated to implement in any systemic way, that being learning to become less competitive and greedy.
Came to say the same thing
And yet, mentalising is constrained to a subset of mental state possibilities, not the set of all mental states. That in and of itself, is interesting. Plus it’s really easy for a lot of us to do!
Equally, the idea that we theorize about what is going on in someone else’s mind is one idea about how we do it. The other side of that argument being that we simulate it. Although it’s not entirely improbable that different people have different ways they mentalise.
Legit. Our biggest power can be our greatest personal threat
💯
Fascinating. I don’t know much about this, could you please do say more about both points.
This was such a refreshingly insightful read. I'm so glad I stumbled across it.
I recently finished reading Hofstatder's I Am A Strange Loop and this perfectly complemented it. After all, the "self" is really just perception bent back on itself. When we apply this concept to sociality, it's almost obvious that we all require the ability to hold a (lower resolution) copy of another's "I" within our own, out of pure survival.
Turning outwards, away from survival of an individual and looking at survival of the species, this mechanism is also required. Neurons communicate with other neurons using local rules, and consciousness - necessary for survival - emerges. Brains communicate with other brains using local rules, and global consciousness - necessary for species survival - emerges.
Again, a great and thought-provoking read.
Thank you and I am so glad this has provided food for thought. I am truly surprised how this ‘biological’ aspect of presence of others is overlooked - I count myself in there. We do tend to see sociality as a nice and important addition but not a survival need IMO. Thank you so much for reading Juliette, much appreciated.
My psychotherapy lecturers used to say, quite often. We are born alone and we die alone. I would increasingly aggravatedly respond we are not born alone. We are in fact born with an active biological exchange of oxygen with our mothers which will be cut as she simultaneously provided us with an antibody stuffed nutrition. So yes Maslow needs tempering with Winnicott and where the wisdom they got taught and wrote down comes from needs acknowledgement. E.g aeons of primary and elder care giving.
I know! I don’t know why I needed neuroscience to realise that.
The pyramid was drawn by a consulting psychologist, not Maslow. Maslow allowed for needs to be partially met before other needs being sought after. He added self-transcendence as a 6th need later on. The info appears mid way through the following post.
https://thediagnosis.substack.com/p/a-2000-year-old-machine-powered-entirely?utm_source=publication-search
Thank you! I didn’t mean to come down hard on Maslow but not sure if it comes across that way. Thank you for sharing the post and I will modify accordingly. All I really wanted to say is that many of us have that blind spot and it was a perfect illustration.
Well Maslow never drew that pyramid. If I remember correctly.
Hey! Indeed. The visual representation is missing, but the hierarchy is in the paper and corresponds to the pyramid as represented in the figure that used for this article.
This is so good, Ana! I just kept thinking, of course social connection is the baseline - do we even have a sense of self without others? Do we know who we are if we don’t have interactions to figure it out? Maybe a bit dramatic, it’s late. But loneliness is such a threat to our health that maybe it’s not too far-fetched to wonder.
Thank you 🫶. I was genuinely one of those people who didn’t realise the full importance of it until I read about this stuff.
I think you make an important point. We have probably underestimated the role of social relationships in development and wellbeing, and I agree that the classic interpretation of Maslow leaves sociality looking like an optional extra rather than something fundamental.
I do wonder, however, whether the problem is deeper than where social connection sits within the pyramid.
Perhaps the pyramid itself is the wrong model.
Biology rarely works through neat hierarchies. Sleep influences emotion. Nutrition alters cognition. Movement changes stress physiology. Belonging affects inflammation and autonomic regulation. Learning changes behaviour, which in turn reshapes relationships. These are not separate layers waiting for the one below to be completed; they are interacting systems.
I've been thinking instead about what I call the interostate—the organism's integrated internal state at any moment. That state emerges from many interacting conditions: nutrition, sleep and circadian rhythm, movement, relationships, kindness, gratitude, teaching and the wider environment. Together they determine how the child thinks, feels and behaves. Over time, repeated interostates become stable patterns of cognition and behaviour.
In that framework, social connection remains profoundly important, but not because it occupies the bottom of a hierarchy. Rather, it is one of the major determinants of the interostate, alongside the other biological and environmental conditions that continuously regulate the organism.
Perhaps the question is not which need comes first? Perhaps the better question is what conditions create the internal state from which healthy development emerges?
That seems to move us away from a hierarchy of needs towards a systems model of human development.
I think you make an important point. We have probably underestimated the role of social relationships in development and wellbeing, and I agree that the classic interpretation of Maslow leaves sociality looking like an optional extra rather than something fundamental.
I do wonder, however, whether the problem is deeper than where social connection sits within the pyramid.
Perhaps the pyramid itself is the wrong model.
Biology rarely works through neat hierarchies. Sleep influences emotion. Nutrition alters cognition. Movement changes stress physiology. Belonging affects inflammation and autonomic regulation. Learning changes behaviour, which in turn reshapes relationships. These are not separate layers waiting for the one below to be completed; they are interacting systems.
I've been thinking instead about what I call the interostate—the organism's integrated internal state at any moment. That state emerges from many interacting conditions: nutrition, sleep and circadian rhythm, movement, relationships, kindness, gratitude, teaching and the wider environment. Together they determine how the child thinks, feels and behaves. Over time, repeated interostates become stable patterns of cognition and behaviour.
In that framework, social connection remains profoundly important, but not because it occupies the bottom of a hierarchy. Rather, it is one of the major determinants of the interostate, alongside the other biological and environmental conditions that continuously regulate the organism.
Perhaps the question is not which need comes first? Perhaps the better question is what conditions create the internal state from which healthy development emerges?
That seems to move us away from a hierarchy of needs towards a systems model of human development.
This article was so interesting. I am a primary teacher and we non stop talk about allows hierarchy. I don’t think he was incorrect but it was definitely time to evolve his framework! I am going to be hanging the poster in my classroom <3
We are such evolved animals but because of our intellect we almost close off due to the fact that that everyone does have different mental states. The fear of ‘being judged’ We are all so individual that the only thing the connects us and makes us feel whole is community/ society.