D. (2) Comparison of Maslow and Orderliness of Choice

(2) Comparison of Maslow and Orderliness of Choice

 

 

Earlier, I argued that there is an order to human choices, stating that the order is ㉠ physical safety, ㉡ material abundance, and ㉢ ideational value^[Ch.2.18]. However, there are many scholars who have presented different content in terms of orderliness of choice. Therefore, it is necessary to critically examine the views of such scholars. Representative examples include Maslow's hierarchy of needs and Parag Khanna's political choice order. Rousseau also demonstrates a similar way of thinking in Discourse on Inequality.

 

Maslow's hierarchy of needs is a motivational theory that suggests human needs form a series of stages based on their importance. According to this theory, humans choose in the following order: ① physiological needs, ② safety needs, ③ social needs, ④ esteem needs, and ⑤ self-actualization needs. Maslow argues that these five needs form a hierarchical structure in terms of their intensity and the order in which they are satisfied. That is, starting from the lower-level needs, such as physiological needs, and moving up to higher-level needs, such as self-actualization, they must be satisfied in sequence. For example, social needs and self-actualization needs will not arise if an individual's physiological needs are not met.

 

From this perspective, it appears that humans prioritize ② material prosperity (economic goods) over ① physical safety. However, a more precise examination and critique are necessary. The core of the argument can be summarized in two points: firstly, contrary to the phrasing, there are aspects in which the content they describe aligns with my claims in this book; and secondly, unlike my claims, their argument is based on certain implicit assumptions.

 

First, let me examine the point where his their argument is practically similar to mine. The fundamentally similar aspect is that Parag Khanna's position, based on Maslow, assumes a survival process theory, and the same is true in Rousseau. Rousseau said, "The first emotion humans had was about their own survival, and the first care was for self-preservation." In particular, the core content of Maslow's hierarchy of needs is that there is a priority order to satisfy various human needs, and that order prioritizes what is immediately necessary for human survival and selects things that have long-term and indirect effects later on.

 

Due to this common premise, Maslow's prioritized physiological needs significantly overlap with the need for physical safety that I emphasize. Maslow's physiological needs include breathing and water. When these physiological needs are deprived, survival is immediately threatened. Similarly, one could argue that the desire to avoid physical harm from knives or guns can also be included in Maslow's physiological needs.

 

On the other hand, if you look at the content presented by Maslow's safety needs, which may seem to correspond to my concept of 'physical safety', it includes not only physical safety but also safety of employment, safety of morality, and safety of property. In my terms, this means that aspects that could be included in 'material abundance (safety of employment)' or 'ideational value (safety of morality)' are also encompassed within the scope of safety needs.

 

Second, there is a reason why the specific priorities in choices differ between Maslow's basic premises and mine, despite their similarities. It is because the order of needs listed by Maslow is based on humans living in a stable society. Rousseau also thinks in the same way. In Rousseau's view, humans in a primitive state first focus on finding food and learning how to produce it, and only later mention the situations where they have to fight against ferocious animals trying to take their lives, or struggle against other people in competition and concede their means of living to the strong. In contrast, I aim to explain political and social conditions, and therefore, I presuppose the primal wild conditions that form the basis of social conditions, so the content implicitly assumed by Maslow is explicitly stated in the choices. Interest in human psychology mainly arises within a stable society, and thus the investigation of what humans prioritize in choices is conducted in situations where the threat of primal violence has already been resolved. In these conditions, the resolution of The resolution of basic living necessities becomes the top priority.

 

Parag Khanna was led astray by Maslow's expressions, misunderstanding the order of economic power and security. Furthermore, unlike me, Parag Khanna sought to explain political phenomena limited to specific contemporary areas. This can be seen in his statement, "Today, military power is less important than in the past. In a world where science and technology that enable each country to protect itself are widespread, the importance of military power is further diminished."

 

Despite various debates, the question of which comes first is always a point of contention among scholars. However, from the perspective of psychologists, it seems clear that generally, 'survival' occupies the top priority in the list. Moreover, it is even more evident that the threat to survival from physical safety is more direct than hunger or illness. This is because one can endure hunger for about an hour, but being shot can result in immediate death.