37

This shit must be from 1960 or the US version or something

all 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] emizeko@hexbear.net 24 points 7 months ago

today's world of affluence

lol. lmao

[-] edge@hexbear.net 19 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Sex should be under social needs, but other than that I don't see what's wrong with it as a general framework.

[-] NephewAlphaBravo@hexbear.net 20 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

the framework is fine, it's the context of "unfortunately it's harder to motivate workers via starvation now of days"

[-] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 7 months ago

That's why we have rents.

[-] MF_COOM@hexbear.net 15 points 7 months ago

Survival needs

sex

volcel-judge

[-] SkingradGuard@hexbear.net 12 points 7 months ago

sex

I'm supposed to be having sex? doomer

[-] allthetimesivedied@hexbear.net 11 points 7 months ago

The concept of these as a “hierarchy” is bullshit. I am homeless and I struggle to get enough to eat every day, and yet, what makes me sad all the fucking time is the loneliness—specifically the loss of a friend last year (they aren’t dead, just not talking to me).

[-] ReadFanon@hexbear.net 6 points 7 months ago

Yeah, I've struggled with my own conditions although not as much as your situation, and I hate Maslow's Hierarchy because I've been able to engage in some of the higher-order parts of it while lacking some of the lower-order parts; right now you are engaging in the social connection and belonging aspects but (without presuming to speak on your behalf authoritatively) I'm gonna guess that you are lacking in some of the lower-order parts of the hierarchy as we speak.

People will either forego the lower-order needs in order to achieve the higher-order things or their need to achieve the higher-order stuff will supercede their need for the lower-order stuff. If you respect people's autonomy then you should reject Maslow's Hierarchy because it imposes a set of priorities that are completely external to the individual.

I mean, it's fine if you're dealing with a first-year social work student or whatever - someone who needs to be shaken out of their comfortably "middle" class existence to recognise that people who lack food or shelter are generally going to be unwilling or incapable of the higher-order stuff on the hierarchy and so they need to focus on the lower-order stuff first but the whole thing is just meh.

[-] happyandhappy@hexbear.net 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

https://gatherfor.medium.com/i-got-it-wrong-7d9b314fadff interesting article on where the hierarchy of needs came from (vulgarisation of Blackfoot knowledge) and also a lot of the misconceptions around it.

the pyramid is completely made up lol

[-] Acute_Engles@hexbear.net 6 points 7 months ago

bonus: if your workers are good, let them see a loved one!

[-] ReadFanon@hexbear.net 4 points 7 months ago

Level 1 with the glaring oversight by failing to mention adequate healthcare lol

If you're unfortunate enough to live in the US, that definitely wasn't intentional.

[-] Taster_Of_Treats@hexbear.net 2 points 7 months ago

You can visit your partner in the hospital, but only as a treat. What the actual fuck is wrong with the person who wrote this? They're an emotionless manipulator.

[-] Acute_Engles@hexbear.net 2 points 7 months ago

I commented on the entire thing and the teacher ended up saying it was pretty brutal

this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2024
37 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13551 readers
669 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS