Motivation and personality maslow pdf

Motivation and personality. Your email address will not be published. Home and pdf the pdf book pdf how book pdf books for book free pdf edition pdf online pdf download the book best books book pdf free download and book novel for pdf.

The 5 Levels of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs By Saul McLeod , updated Maslow's hierarchy of needs is a motivational theory in psychology comprising a five-tier model of human needs, often depicted as hierarchical levels within a pyramid.

Needs lower down in the hierarchy must be satisfied before individuals can attend to needs higher up. From the bottom of the hierarchy upwards, the needs are: physiological, safety, love and belonging, esteem and self-actualization. This five-stage model can be divided into deficiency needs and growth needs. File Name: motivation and personality maslow pdf. Maslow's Hierarchy Of Needs Explained.

The original hierarchy of needs five-stage model includes: AND ception of the human personality by reaching into the "higher" levels of human nature. Celebrate recovery step study book 1 pdf. What is green eggs and ham about book summary. Personality theories. Belmont, CA : Dorsey. Malson, L.

Wolf children and the problem of human nature. New York : Monthly Review Press. Maslow, A. Religions, values, and peak experiences. Eupsychian management: A journal. Homewood, IL : Irwin-Dorsey. Toward a psychology of being 2nd ed. New York : Van Nostrand. The psychology of science: A reconnaissance. Motivation andpersonality 2nd ed. The farther reaches of human nature. New York : Viking. Mathes, E. Maslow's hierarchy of needs as a guide for living.

Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 21 4 , 69 - Millon, T. Modern psychopathology. Philadelphia : W. Miner, J. Personal attitudes and motivation.

Annual Review of Psychology, 24, - Neher, A. The psychology of transcendence 2nd ed. New York : Dover. Piattelli-Palmarini, M. Language and learning. Selye, H. Stress without distress. Philadelphia : Lippincott. Smith, M. On self-actualization: A transambivalent examination of a focal theme in Maslow's psychology. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 13 2 , 17 - Turnbull, C.

The mountain people. Wahba, M. Maslow reconsidered: A review of research on the need hierarchy theory. Porter Eds. White, R. Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. This, in turn, means much more careful attention to the operational meaning of "good growth" at every age level. Finally, I must point out that we shall have to prepare ourselves in principle for the shaking consequences of giving up the alibi of social injustice.

The more we continue to reduce social injustice, the more we shall find this replaced by "biological injustice," by the fact that babies. Whom shall we blame when a baby is boum with a bad heart, or weak kidneys, or with neuro- logical defects? In this chapter, and also in other papers, I have introduced the concept of "subjective biology. I hope this discovery, that one can and must study one's own biology introspectively and subjectively, will be of hei1 to others, especially to biologists.

Chapter 9 on 1 estrtmctivcness has been extensively reworked. I have sub- sumed it under the more inclusive category of the psychology of evil, hoping to demonstrate by this careful treatment of one aspect of evil, that the whole problern is empirically and scientifically workable.

Bring- ing it under the jurisdiction of empirical science means for nie that we an confidently look forward to steadily increased understanding whelm always has meant being able to do something about it. Aggression, we have learned, is both genetically and culturally deter- mined. Also i consider extremely important the distinction between healthy and unhealthy aggression.

Just as aggression cannot be blamed entirely on either society or inner human nature, so also is it already clear that evil in general is neither a social product alone or a psychological product alone. This may sound too obvious to be mentioned, but there are today many people who riot only believe in these untenable theories but who act I1Ofl them as well.

I have introduced in Chapter lO, "The Expressive Component of Be- havior," the concept of Apollonian controls, Le, desirable controls which do not endanger gratification but rather enhance it.

I consider this concept to be profoundly important both for pure psychological theory and foi- applied psychology. I have not taken the tizne to bring this conceptual tool to bear upon the old problems of freedom, ethics, politics, happiness, and the like, but. I think its relevance and power will be obvious to any serious thinker in these fields. The psychoanalyst will notice that this solution overlaps to some extent with Freud's integration ol pleasure principle and reality principle.

To think through the similarities and differences will, T think, be a profitable exercise for the theorist of psychodynamics. In Chapter 1 on self-actualization I have removed one source of con- 1.

By the criteria I used, self-actualization does not occur in young people. In our culture at least, youngsters have not yet achieved identity, or autonomy, nor have they had time enough to experience an enduring, loyal, post- romantic love relationship, nor have they generally found their calling, the altar upon which to offer themselves.

Nor have they worked out their own system of values; nor have they had experience enough responsibil- it ' for others, tragedy, failure, achievement, success to shed perfection- istic illusions and become realistic; nor have they generally made their peace with death; nor have they learned how to be patient; nor have they learned enough about evil in themselves and others to be compas- sionate; nor have they had time to become post-ambivalent about parents and elders, power and authority; nor have they generally become knowl- edgeable and educated enough to open the possibility of becoming wise; nor have they generally acquired enough courage to be unpopular, to be unashamed about being openly virtuous, etc.

In any case, it is better psychological strategy to separate the concept of mature, fully-human, self-actualizing people in whom the human potentialities have been realized and actualized f'omn the concept of health at any age level.

This translates itself, I have found, into "good- growth-toward-self-actualization," a quite meaningful and researchable concept. I have done enough exploration with college age youngsters to have satisfied myself that it is possible to differentiate "healthy" from "unhealthy. Young people arc unsure of themselves, not yet formed, uneasy because of their minority position with their peers their private opinions and tastes are more square, straight, metarnotivated, i.

They are secretly uneasy about the cruelty, meanness, and mob spirit so often found in young people, etc. Of course I do not know that this syndrome inevitably grows into. Only longitudinal studies can determine this. I have described my self-actualizing subjects as transcending national- ism. I could have added that they also transcend class and caste. This is true in my experience even though I would expect a priori that affluence and social dignity arc apt to make self-actualization more probable.

Another question which I did not anticipate in my first report has been this: Arc these people capable of living only with "good" people and in a good world only? My retrospective impression, which of course remains to be checked, is that self-actualizing people are essentially flex- ible, and can adapt themselves realistically to any people, any environ- ment. I think they are ready to handle good people as good people. Another addition to the description of self-actualizing people emerged from my study of "grumbles" and the widespread tendency to undervalue one's already achieved need-gratifications, or even to devalue them and throw them away.

Self-actualizing persons are rela- tively exempted From this profound source of human unhappiness, in a word, they are capable of "gratitude. Miracles remain miracles even though occurring again and again. The awareness of undeserved good luck, of gratuitous grace, guarantees for them that life remains precious and never grows stale.

My study of self-actualizing persons has worked out very well-to my great relief, I must confess. It was, after all, a great gamble, doggedly pursuing an intuitive conviction and, in the process, defying some of the basic canons of scientific method and of philosophical criticism.

These were, after all, rules which I myself had believed and accepted, and was very much aware that I was skating on thin ice. Accordingly, my explorations proceeded against a background of anxiety, conflict, and self-doubt. Enough verifications and supports have accumulated in the last few decades see Bibliography so that this kind of basic alarm is no longer necessary. And yet I am very much aware that these basic methodological and theoretical problems still confront us.

The work that has been done is a bare beginning. We are now ready for far more objective, consensual and impersonal team methods of selecting self-actualizing healthy, fully. Cross-cultural work is clearly indicated. Follow-ups, from the cradle to the grave, will furnish the only truly satisfactory validation, at least in my opinion. Sampling the total population is clearly necessary in addition to selecting, as I did, the. Nor do I think we can ever understand irreducible human evil until we explore more fully than I did the "incurable" sins and the shortcomings of the best human beings we can find.

Such studies I am convinced will change our philosophy of science , of ethics and values , of religion , of work, management and interpersonal relations , of society , and who knows what else.

In addition, I think that great social and educational changes could occur almost immediately if, for instance, we could teach our young people to give up their unreal perfectionism, their demands for perfect human beings, a perfect society, perfect teachers, perfect parents, perfect politicians, perfect marriages, perfect friends, perfect organizations, etc.

Such expectations we already know, even with our inadequate knowledge, arc illusions and, therefore, must inevitably and inexorably breed disillusionment along with attendant disgust, rage, depression and revenge. The demand for "Nirvana Now! If you demand a perfect leader or a perfect society, you thereby give p choos- ing between better and worse.

If the imperfect is defined as evil, then everything becomes evil, since everything is imperfect. L believe also, on the positive side, that this great frontier of research is. Here lies the value system, the religion-surrogate, the idealism- satisfier, the normative philosophy of life that all human beings seem to need, to yearn for, and without which they become nasty and mean, vulgar and trivial.

Psychological health not only feels good subjectively but is also correct, true, real. In this sense, it is "better" than sickness and superior to it. Not only is it correct and truc, but it is more perspicuous, seeing more truths as well as higher truths. That is, the lack of health not only feels awful but is a forni of blindness, a cognitive pathology as well as moral and emotional loss. Furthcrmore, it is a form of crippling, of loss of capacities, of lesser ability to do and to achieve.

Healthy persons exist even though not in great numbers. Health with all its values-truth, goodness, beauty, etc. For those who prefer seeing to being blind, feeling good to feeling baci, wholeness to being crippled, it can he recommended that they seek psychological health. One remembers the little girl who, when asked why. The same is true of a good marriage, a good friendship, good parents. Not only arc these desired preferred, chosen , but they are also, in specific senses, "desirable.

Thc demonstration that wonderful people can and do exist-even though in very short suppiy, and having feet of clay-is enough to give us courage, hope, strength to fight on, faith in ourselves and in our own possibilities for growth. Also, hope for human nature, however sober, should help us toward brotherliness and compassion. A positive psychology is at least available today though not very widely. The humanistic psychologies, the new transcendent psychologies, the existential, the Rogerian, the experiential, the holistic, the value-seeking psychologies, are all thriving and available, at least in the United States, though unfortunately not yet in most de- partments of psychology, so that the interested student must seek them out or just stumble across them.

For the reader who would like to taste for himself, I think a good sampling of the people, the ideas and the lata is most easily available in the various books of readings by Mousta- kas , Severin , Bugental 69 , and Sutich and Vich For addresses of the appropriate schools, journals, societies, I would recommend the Eupsychian Netwok, an appendix in my book, Toward a Pcychology of Being see For uneasy graduate students I would still recommend this last chapter in the first edition, which is probably available in most uni- versity libraries.

Also recommended is my Psychology of Science for the same reasons. For those who are willing to take these questions seriously enough to work hard at them, the great book in the field is Polanyi's Personal Knowledge This revised edition is an example of the increasingly firm rejection of traditionally value-free science-or rather of the futile effort to have a value-free science.

It is more frankly normative than it was, more con-. To some this will seem like an assault upon the science that they. I accept that their fear is sometimes well founded. There are many, especially in the social sciences, who see total political commitment by definition in the absence of full informa- tion as the only conceivable alternative to value-free science and mutsi- ally exclusive with it. Embracing the one means for them necessarily rejecting the other.

That this dichotomizing is sophomoric is at once by the simple fact that it is best to get col-recE inFormation even when you are fighting an enemy, even when you are avowedly a politician. But quite beyond this self-defeating foolishness, and addressing our- selves to this very serious question at the highest levels of which we are capable, I believe it can be shown that normative zeal to do good, to help mankind, to better the world is quite compatible with scientific objectivity and indeed even makes conceivable a better, a more powerful science with a far wider jurisdiction than it now has when it tries to be value-neutral leaving values to be arbitrarily affirmed by non-scientists on noii-factual grounds.

This is achieved simply by enlarging our con- ception of objectivity to include not only "spectator-knowledge" laissez- faire, uninvolved knowledge, knowledge about, knowledge from the -. The simple model of Taoistic objectivity comes from the phenom- enology of disinterested love and admiration for the Being of the other B-love.

For instance, loving one's baby, or friend, or profession, or even one's "problem" or field in science, can be so complete and accepting that it becomes non-interfering, non-intrusive, i. It takes great love to be able to leave something alone, to let it be and to become. One caii love one's child that purely, letting him become what is in him to become.

One can love it enough to trust also its becoming. Lt is possible to love one's baby even before it is born, and to wait with bated breath and with great happiness to see what kind of person it will be, and now to love that future person. A priori plans for the child, ambitions for it, prepared roles, even hopes that it will become this or that-all these are non-Taoistic. They represent demands upon the child that it become what the purent has. Such a baby is born into an invisible straitjacket.

Similarly, it is possible to love the truth yet to come, to trust it, to be happy and to marvel as its nature reveals itself. One can believe that the uncontaminated, unmanipulated, unforced, undemanded truth will be more beautiful, more pure, more truly true than that same truth would have been had we forced it to conform to a priori expectations or hopes or plans or current political needs.

Truth also can be born into an "invisible straitjacket. But this is not at all a necessity for the more Taoistic scientist who can love the truth- yet-to-be. I too believe this: that the purer the truth, and the less contaminated it is by doctrinaires whose minds are made up in advance, the better it will be for the future of mankind. I trust that the world will be more bene- fited by the truth of the future than by the political convictions which I hold today.

I trust what will be known more than I trust my present knowledge. This is a humanistic-scientific version of "Not my will but Thine be done.

At many points in this book, and in many publications since, I have assumed that the actualization of a person's real potentialities is condi- tioned upon the pesence of basic-need satisfying parents and other people, upon all those factors now called "ecological," upon the "health" of the culture, or the lack of it, upon the world situation, etc.

Growth toward self-actualization and full-humanness is made possible by a com- plex hierarchy of "good preconditions. As one studies these preconditions, one becomes saddened by the ease with which human poentia1ity can be destroyed or repressed, so that a fully-human person can seem like a miracle, so improbable i happening as to be awe-inspiring. And simultaneously one is heartened by the fact that self-actualizing persons do in fact exist, that they are therefore possible, that the gauntlet of dangers can be run, that the finish line can be crossed.

The investigator here is almost certain to be caught in a cross-fire of accusations both interpersonal and intrapsychic, about being either 'optimistic" or "pessimistic," depending on where he is focusing at the moment. So also will he be accused from one side of being hereditarian, from the other of being environmentalist. Political groups will certainly try to plaster him with one or another label, depending on the headlines of the moment.

The scientist of course will resist these all-or-none tendencies to dichotomize and rubricize, and will continue to think in terms of degree, and to be holistically aware of many, many determinants acting simul. He will try as hard as he can to be receptive to the data, dif- ferentiating them as clearly as he can from his wishes, hopes, and fears.

It is now quite clear that these problems-what is the good person and what is the good society-fall well within the jurisdiction of. This book focuses much more on the first problem-the fully-human person, than on the second problem-what kind of society makes him possible. I have written a good deal on the subject since when this book first appeared, but have refrained from trying to incorporate these findings into this revised edition.

Ins ead i will refer the reader to some of my writings on the subject , , , 3lla, SUb, , and also urge as strongly as i can the necessity of becoming acquainted with the rich research literature on normative social psychology called vari- ously Organizational Development, Organization Theory, Management Theory, etc. The implications of these theories, case reports and re- searches seem to me to be profound, offering as they do a real alternative, for instance, to the various versions of Mandan theory, of democratic and authoritarian theories, and of other available social philosophies.

I am again and again astonished that so few psychologists are even aware of the work of, for instance, Argyris 15, 16 , Bennis 42, 43, 45 , Likert , and McGregor , to mention only a few of the well-known workers in the field.

In any case, anyone who wishes to take seriously the theory of self-actualization must also take seriously this new kind of. If I were to choose a single journal to recommend to the person who wishes to keep in touch with the current developments in this area, it would be the Journal of Applied Behavioral Sciences, in spite of its totally misleading title.

Finally, I wish to say a word about this book as a transition to human- istic psychology, or what has come to be called Third Force. Immature though it yet is from a scientific point of view, humanistic psychology lias already opened the doors to study of all those psychological phenom- ena which can be called transcendent or transpersonal, data which were closed off in principle by the inherent philosophical limitations of behaviorism and Freudianism.

Among such phenomena I include not only higher and more positive states of consciousness and of personality, i. Already a new Journal of Trans- personal Psychology has begun publishing on these subjects. It is possible already to start thinking about the transhuman, a psychologyand a philosophy which transcends the human species itself.

This is yet to come. Laughlin Charitable Foundation. I wish first to express my deep thanks to Bill Laughlin and the W. Laughlin Charitable Foundation for granting me a resident fellowship which gave me the time and freedom to do this revision. Theoretical work of this kind-thinking problems through to their depths-is a full-time job.

Without this fellowship I would not have undertaken it. I wish also to acknowledge with thanks the fellowship granted to me for the year by the Fund for the Advancement of Education of the Ford Foundation. Kay Pontius did not only all the secretarial work that the book entailed but helped with the Bibliography, editing, proofreading, and many other jobs.

This was all donc efficiently, intelligently, and cheerfully. I wish to acknowledge her hard work and to thank her for it. I wish also to thank Mrs. Hilda Smith, my former secretary at Brandeis. University, for her help in getting this work started before I left the university.

Marylyn Morrell generously helped with the Bibliogra- phy. George Middendorl of Harper Row suggested to me this revised edition and now I am glad that he did. I have acknowledged many of my intellectual debts in my other books, and in the Bibliography of this book, and will not repeat them here. I wish to thank the many friends-too many to mention-who helped me by listening, by conversations, and by debating.

Thinking xxix. My wife, Bertha, who got this kind of sounding board treat- ment every day, almost always managed to be patient and helpful. I wish here to thank her for her help and to marvel at her patience. Its origins are in human motives, its goals are human goals, and it is created, renewed, and main- tained by human beings. Its laws, organization, and articulations rest not only on the nature of the reality that it discovers, but also on the nature of the human nature that does the discovering.

The psychologist, espe- cially if he has had any clinical experience, will quite naturally and spon- taneously approach any subject matter in a personal way by studying people, rather than the abstractions they produce, scientists as well as science. The misguided effort to make believe that this is not so, the persistent attempt to make science completely autonomous and self-regulating and to regard it as a disinterested game, having intrinsic, arbitrary chesslike rules, the psychologist must consider unrealistic, false, and even anti- empirical.

In this chapter, I wish first to spell out some of the more important truisms on which this thesis is based. Some implications and consequences of the thesis will then be presented. Scientists are motivated, like all other members of the human species, by species-wide needs for food, etc. These are the needs that are best known to psychologists for the simple reason that their frustration produces psychopathology.

Less studied but knowable through common observation are the cognitive needs for sheer knowledge curiosity and for understanding the philosophical, theological, value-system-building explanation need. Finally, least well known are the impulses to beauty, symmetry, and possibly to simplicity, completion, and order, which we may call aesthetic needs, and the needs to express, to act out, and to motor completion that may be related to these aesthetic needs.

To date it seems as if all other needs or desires or drives are either means to the basic ends listed above, or are neurotic, or else are products of certain kinds of learning processes. Obviously the cognitive needs are of most concern to the philosopher of science. However, it is this latter theoretical urge that is more specifically a sine qua non for science, for sheer curiosity is seen often enough in animals , But the other motives are certainly also involved in science at all its stages.

It is too often overlooked that the original theorizers of science often thought of science primarily as a means to help the human race. Bacon 24 , for instance, expected much amelioration of disease and poverty from science.

The feeling of identification and belongingness with people in general, and even more strongly the feeling of love for human beings may often be the primary motivation in many men o science.

Some people go into science, as they might into social work or medicine, in order to help people. And then finally we must recognize that any other human need may serve as a primary motivation for going into science, for working at it, or for staying in it. It may serve as a living, a source of prestige, a means of self-expression, or as a satisfaction for any one of many neurotic needs. In most persons, a single primary all-important motive is less often found than a combination in varying amounts of all motivations working simultaneously.

It is safest to assume that in any single scientist his work is motivated not only by love, but also by simple curiosity, not only by prestige, but also by the need to earn money, etc.

In any case it is now quite clear that it is obsolete to dichotomize reason and animality, for reason is quite as animal as eating, at any rate in the human animal. Impulse is not necessarily in contrast with intelligent judgment, for intelligence is itself an impulse. In any case, it begins to appear more and more clearly that in the healthy human being, rational- ity and impulse are synergic, and strongly tend to come to similar con- cjusions rather than contrasting ones.

The noni-ational is not necessarily irrational or antirational; it is more often prorational. A chronic discrep- ancy or antagonism between conation and cognition is usually itself a product of social or individual pathology.

Man's need for love or for respect is quite as "sacred" as hi need for the truth. Human nature dictates both and they need not even be dichotomized. It is easily possible to have fun in science and at the same time to do good. The Greek respect for reason was not wrong but only too exclusive. Aristotle did not see that love is quite as human as reason. The occasional instances in which there is temporary conflict between cognitive need gratification and emotional need gratificaton set us a prob- lem of integration, cordination, and pacing, rather than of conflict and opposition.

It can happen that the pure, objective, disinterested non- humanistic curiosity of the pure scientist may jeopardize the gratification of other equally important human needs, e. I refer here not only to the obvious atom bomb example but also to the more general fact that science itself implies a value system. After all, the limit to which the 'pure" scientist approaches is not an Einstein or a Newton but rather the Nazi "scientist" of the concentration-camp experiments or the "mad" scientist of Hohl 'wood.

A fuller, more humanistic and transcendental definition of truth and science may be found in 66, , Science for science's sake can be just as sick as art for art's sake. There is some- thing in science for all, old and young, bold and timid, duty-bound or fun loving.

Some seek in it immediately humanistic ends; others delight precisely in its impersonal, nonhuman qualities. Some seek lawfulness primarily; others stress content and want to know more about "impor- tant" things even if less precisely and elegantly. Some like trail breaking and pioneering; others prefer the settler's work, the organizing, the tidy- ing, and the policing of territory already won.

Some seek safety in science; others adventure and excitement. No Inore than we can describe the ideal wife can we describe the ideal science or scientist, or method or question or activity or research. Just as we can approve of marriage in general and still leave individual choices to individual tastes, so also can we be pluralistic in science.

WTe can differentiate out in science at least the following functions:. Its problem-seeking questionasking, hunch-encouraging, hypoth- eses-producing function 2. Its testing, checking, confirming and disconfirming, and verifying function; its trying out and testing of hypotheses; its repetition and checking of experiments; its piling up of facts; making facts more reliable 3.

Its organizing, theorizing, structuring function; its search for larger and larger generalizations 4. Its history-collecting, scholarly function 5. Its technological side; instruments, methods, techniques 6. Its administrative, executive, and organizational side 7.

Its publicizing and educational functions 8. Its applications to human uses 9. This multiplicity of function implies necessarily a division of labor, for few individuals could combine within themselves all these skills.

Divi- sion of labor calls for different kinds of people, different tastes, different capacities and skills. Tastes reflect and express character and personality. This is not less true for tastes in fields of science, e. It is also true, though probably in a lower degree, for choice of particular problem within a field, e. We all complement and need each other in science. If everyone pre- ferred physics to biology, scientific advance would be impossible. It is fortunate that we have different tastes in scientific pursuits in the same way that it is fortunate that not all of us love the same climate or the same musical instrument.

Because some like violins, and others like clar- inets or drums, the orchestra becomes possible. So does science in its broadest sense become possible through differences in taste. Science needs all kinds of people I say this rather than, "Science can tolerate all kinds of people" just as art does, or philosophy, or politics, since each person can ask different questions and see different worlds.

Even the schizo- phrenic can be peculiarly useful, for his illness sensitizes him in certain special ways. The monistic pressure is a real langer in science because of the fact that often "knowledge about the human species" really means only "knowl- edge about oneself. For instance, the physicist, the biologist, and the sociologist have already demonstrated that they are fundamen- tally different in important respects by their choice of field 4Ol.

We may quite reasonably expect them, because of this basic difference in taste, to have different definitions of science, of method, and of the goals anti values of science.

Clearly we need the same kind of tolerance and accept- ance of individual differences among scientists as we do in other human realms. Since science as an institution is partly a magnified projection of certain aspects of human nature, any increment in the knowledge of these aspects will be automatically multiplied many times.

For instance, every science and every theory within every science will be affected by improved knowledge of I the nature of bias and objectivity, 2 the nature of the abstracting process, 3 the nature of creativity, 4 the nature of enculturation and of the scientist's resistance to enculturation, 5 the contamination of perception by wishes, hopes, anxieties, expecta- tions, 6 the nature of the scientist's role or status, 7 anti-intellectualism.

Of course even more primary are the questions we have already nien- tioned, particularly about the motivations and aims of scientists , Science is based on human values and is itself a value system Human emotional, cognitive, expressive, and aesthetic needs give science its origins and its goals.

The gratification of any such need is a "value. The aesthetic satisfactions of succinctness, parsimony, elegance, simplicity, pre- cision, neatness, are values to the mathematician and to the scientist as they are to the craftsman, to the artist, or the philosopher.

These are quite al art from the fact that as scientists we share the basic values of our culture and probably will always have to, at least to some extent, e.

Clearly "objectivity" and "disinterested observations" are phrases that need redefining This exclusion is quite as necessary today as it was at the time of the Renais- sance because we still want our facts as uncontaminated as possible.

If organized religion today is only a feeble threat to science in our country, we still have strong political and economic dogmas to contend with. However, the only way we now know of preventing contamination of our perception of nature, of society, or of ourselves, by human values, is to be very conscious of these values at all times, to understand their influence on perception, and with the aid of such understanding to make the neces- sary corrections.

By contamination, I mean the confusion of psychic determinants with reality determinants, when it is the latter we seek to perceive. The study of values, of needs and wishes, of bias, of fears, of interests, and of neurosis must become a basic aspect of all scientific studies.

Such a statement must include also the most generalized tendencies of all human beings to abstract, to classify, to see similarities and differ- ences, and in general, to pay selective attention to reality andto shuffle. To organize our perceptions under various rubrics "to rubricize" in this way is desirable and useful in some ways and is undesirable and harmful in other ways, for, while it throws some aspects of reality into sharp relief, it simultaneously throws other aspects of reality into shadow.

We must understand that while nature gives us clues to classification, and that it sometimes has "natural" lines of cleavage, often these clues are only minimal or ambiguous. We must often create or impose a classifica. Lion upon nature. This we do in accordance not only with nature's sug- gestions but also in accordance with our own human nature, our own unconscious values, biases, and interests. Granted that the ideal of science is to reduce to a minimum these human determinants of theory, this will never be achieved by denying their influcnce, but only by knowing them well.

It should reassure the uneasy pure scientist to know that the point of all this disquieting talk about values is to achieve more efficiently his goal, i. The laws of human psychology and of nonhuman nature are in sorne respects the same, but are in some respects utterly different.

The fact that humans live in the natural world does not mean that their rules and laws need to be the same. The human being, living in the real world, certainly has to make concessions to it, but this in itself is not a denial of the fact that the human being has intrinsic laws, which are not those of natural reality. Wishes, fears, dreams, hopes, all behave differently from pebbles, wires, temperatures, or atoms. A philosophy is not constructed in the same way as a bridge. A family and a crystal must be studied in different ways.

All ou talk about motives and values does not imply a wish to subjectivize or psychologize nonhuman nature, but of course, we must psychologize human nature. This nonhuman reality is independent of the wishes and needs of human beings, being neither beneficent nor malevolent, having no pur- poses, aims, goals, or functions only living beings have purposes , no conative and no affective tendencies.