"all things in existence are physiologically connected"

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs vs Population Problem


Maslow’s hierarchy of needs – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Naturally if the human species keeps growing at the rate that it has over the past 100 years, we will experience as population of near 12,000,000,000 by year 2100C.E. and 24,000,000,000 by year 2200C.E….It is almost unthinkable to imagine what people will do with themselves if jobs and resources are still scarce at that time. The economic management philosophies of the day: Capitalism can only distribute the potential for self actualization, as Maslow defines it to 1% of the most affluent factions of the species. From this standpoint, it is evident that there is in-fact a population problem.

Market forces don’t yield solutions to scarcity, they simple manage them and ensure that goods and services are distributed to the most worthy consumer per some value derivation.

My question to the everyone is: Are we spending our time asking the wrong questions and solving the wrong problems? While efficiency in distribution is ideal, creating environments for abundant resource consumption would be more ideal in the preservation of the species and ensuring that everyone is adding some quality input to our terrestrial and celestial missions.

My next book, Integrationalism: Spiritual disincentives for humanity will discuss self-actualization extensively.



  DG from FB wrote @

1. It is Capitalism and market forces which result in new production methods and product alternatives which remove the previous scarcity.

2. There is only a “population problem” if people’s self esteem is solely based on their perceived status. This is irrational, they should be basing their self esteem on objective values and it is perfectly possible for someone with a menial job to achieve actualization if they can also live within their means and contribute to their family and community.

3. Reducing the population isn’t going to increase levels of self actualization. Less people = less employers = less jobs. Less people = less production = less consumption. It’s only because we have so many people that we can achieve so much specialization and efficiency.

  JFKII wrote @

capitalism is a bit more complex than that, as it involved socio-political institutions and ideologies as well. Regarding markets (a broader topic) forces I am specifically meaning economic in its classical sense (science of decis…ion making, based on distribution of goods/services relative to scarce resources)

Your comment regarding population problems is valid; however, stating the know irrationality of socio-cultural antecedents on human kind is not enough to remedy the overwhelming pressure and anxiety that status (as you mentioned) and consumption creates.
While markets (not capitalism persay) make a tremendous effort to create efficiencies, they also create failure incentives via the existence of arbitrage opportunities that discover, develop, and deploy a discretionary level of quality.

To your earliest point, it would be great to live in a world where people valued themselves based on merit totally removed from their PEST (political, economic, socio-cultural, technological) antecedents; however, it is also impossible per the social and physical laws of relativity. Because we do not live in a perfect world, we have to create incentives for every single action that human kind creates. Knowing this it prudent to assume that we must create incentives for people to develop well…self identification incentives, technological incentives, socio-cultural incentives, educational incentives, etc.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: