Who We Are

'Humans are a dna's way of making more dna.'

Organisms have evolved as a means for replicators (genes, and later, in a subset, memes) to expand their power over their future and destiny. Behaviour is the manner in which the body exerts influence on it's milieu.

The form (body) and functioning (behaviour) is shaped through natural selection. But what is selected for? Genetic survival (and memetic survival), and corporal survival to enable the former.

The mind, as a part of the body, is also an aid to survival. The difference between you and Douglas Kenrich, as I see it, is that the abstract process of natural selection materializes in neurological pathways (or limits of potential to form them) in the brain, where the brain or the conscious mind is completely unaware of the reason of the specific mental mechanism.

Different levels of analysis. This is also why I questioned the use of surveys and interviews.

To illustrate, imagine wanting to know about human mate selection. The materialized psychological need to have sex (proximate) is the result of sex being a necessary criterium for reproduction and therefore provides a substantial reproductive benefit (ultimate).

People build, paint, sing and enterprise to fulfill different desires. But these desires exist because of the universal needs people have (staying alive, obtaining and keeping safety, resources and mates).

My blog was about Maslow, not Kendrick.

The correlation between the strength of the desire for children, and the strength of the desire for sex, is .02, not significant.

Human mate selection is predicted by our profile of basic desires.

With all due respect, it seems absurd to argue that standardized self-report data are at a lower level of analysis than, say, observations of the behavior of apes. An ape can perform the same behavior for different motives.

Your statement that people "build, sing, etc" to fulfill basic desires is wild speculation. You make up ideas, attribute them to work you never read, and then you disprove the idea you made up.

Actually, you miss the point of Maslow. I never seen where he stated that we pass through life-phases based on age. His point with the hierarchy is that one might be living, regardless of age, in a given situation, i.e. afraid of surviving, thus physiological needs of food, etc. Or, perhaps in fear, thus need for security or safety. But these may pass given an improvement of his/her situation. You have the wrong conclusions about Maslow.

You haven't cited any evidence supporting Maslow.

Here is a sample of the negative scientific reviews of Maslow:

In their paper "Maslow Reconsidered; A review of research on the need hierarchy theory," M. A. Wahba and L. G. Bridwell (1976) concluded that "some of Maslow's propositions are totally rejected, while others receive mixed and questionable support at best."FN- p. 23. C. N. Cofer and M. H. Appley (1964) concluded in their book on motivation that Maslow's theory "receives little clear or consistent support" (p. 684). C. P. Alderfer (1972) argued for significant modifications in Maslow's pyramid.

Human needs (universal motives) do not factor into Maslow's categories. In other words, his various safety needs aren't all about safety, and his various belonging needs aren't all about belonging, and so on.

Maslow stated in plain English that he did know how to scientifically study his theory.

You can infer values from needs and vice versa. So positing a universal hierarchy of needs implies that we all have the same values. We don't. Individuals priortize needs in almost as many ways as there are people.

Maslow published direct statements about age.

Artists often invert the Maslow hierarchy of needs. Instead of waiting until all their survival and social needs are met before pursuing self-fulfilment, they do the opposite.

Sacrificing security in shelter, clothing, food, etc., they press on, making art and ignoring their deprivation, for the higher, self-fulfilling pursuit of art.