Examining Abraham Maslow’s Groundbreaking Psychological Theory

In Abraham H. Maslow’s book, Toward a Psychology of Being, the basis of his Holistic-Dynamic Theory is explained in great detail. Maslow’s work was influential in opening the eyes of others to the possibility that neither the psychoanalytic school nor the behaviorism school had it quite right. Maslow did not completely reject the work of those that had gone before him, such as, Freud, Watson, and Skinner (Goble 13). He did, however, have a problem with the much too narrow scope of scientific behaviorism and the much too subjective approach of the unconscious that Freudians took (Goble 16). Maslow also saw a great need for study of healthy individuals and normal behavior. He felt that previous theorists and psychiatrists had not done the work completely necessary to a personality theory by merely looking at unhealthy, neurotic, and even psychotic people (Goble 17).

Maslow viewed man as both being and becoming; he saw that men had an actual self and a potential self (Maslow 10). Unlike other theorists in is day, Maslow said that man is intrinsically neutral and possibly even good (Maslow 3). The ultimate goal is for this natural goodness and potential self to be discovered or actualized. Maslow speaks of this quest for one’s identity as his natural “will to health” (Maslow 193). If a person denies themselves of this growth, they would experience “intrinsic guilt” (Maslow 194). People are simultaneously experiencing an innate fear of growth that prevents them from moving forward (Maslow 46). Maslow organizes what he believes to be the five categorical needs of man in a hierarchical format (Maslow 30). These needs include in their respective order: life, safety and security, belongingness and love, and esteem. If these lower needs are not satisfied, according to Maslow, one cannot become self-actualized (Maslow 34).

Being cognition or B-cognition was what Maslow termed for a higher need to know oneself and their world (Maslow 60). He believed that the meeting of this need was restricted because of our fear to know. Maslow borrowed the fear of oneself from Freud, but included the fear of the world outside of the man. Maslow explained this part of his theory best when he wrote, “Thus to discover in oneself a great talent can certainly bring exhilaration but it also brings a fear of the dangers and responsibilities and duties of being a leader and all alone” (Maslow 61). Perhaps Maslow’s reasoning is a little off on this point because this is certainly not the case with many people and this fear is difficult to measure.

There are some strong points to the ideas and theoretical framework presented by Maslow in his book. Maslow presents a positive view of humankind which was refreshing in his day compared to the other major theorists. Another strong point to his theory was his acknowledgement of free will that is associated with the individual’s power and ability to make life altering decisions. Another strong point of a smaller portion of Maslow’s theory was in the area of what he called the fear of knowledge. Maslow gave extensive support that thoroughly explained the subject of “denying of [one’s] best side” (Maslow 61). Finally, Maslow’s theory fits well into other theoretical frameworks.

It is also important to look at Maslow’s theory as explained in his book Toward a Psychology of Being through the lens of a Christian worldview. On the surface, the Bible has certain concepts in common with Maslow’s theoretical perspective. His idea of the human need of safety can be supported with the desire of man to have assurance of his eternal life in Christ. We can also see symbols of security throughout the Old and New Testaments that reveal man’s desire to feel secure and safe. Among these are: shepherds and strong towers. From the story of creation in the second chapter of Genesis we can see that even God acknowledged that man needed a companion. Within the context of esteem needs, one can look at Philippians 4:13 to see that man can receive his needed esteem from God. There are two passages that have a similar tone to them as does Maslow’s writing on self-actualization. They are Romans 12:1-2 and Philippians 4:11. All of these seemingly biblical affirmations of Maslow’s theory do not compare in number or in depth to the many biblical contradictions that one can find between the ideas presented in his book and The Good Book.

Maslow did not believe the Bible was the true, Word of God. He referred to the history of Adam and Eve as “myth” (Maslow 61). However, as a believer who does believe that the Bible is what it claims, one must compare all worldly ideas up against true Word of God in order to discern what is right. From the biblical perspective, one could argue with Maslow’s need-based theory with respect to the grace that is found in Christ. Ephesians 2:8 says, “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith- and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God.” Based on this verse, one could deduct that man has no needs other than to be blessed with the salvation found through faith in Christ alone. This may, however, be a little extremist or too vague. It could be expounded upon by looking at what the Bible has to say about the specific needs that Maslow accounted for in his hierarchy. The physiological needs of man are addressed Matthew 6 of the Bible. Jesus spoke of the obvious needs man has for food and clothing. Rather than stating what Maslow claims – that if man is not fed they will have great anxiety and will not be able to become self-actualizing- Christ said just the opposite.

Using Maslow’s terminology Jesus stated that if man is actualized in Christ- if he finds his identity and hope in Him- he should not have any anxiety over petty things such as food. That man would trust that His God would provide. Under this truth from the Bible, a quest to satisfy lower level needs before higher ones is a pagan philosophy and would include man living by fear and not faith. Using this same viewpoint, man would not be able to meet what Maslow referred to as the needs of esteem and love without being “actualized” in the person of Christ. As Isaiah 28:16 says, He is to be our cornerstone and our foundation. Operationally defining love is impossible from a secular standpoint. One might say they love spaghetti, another might say they love their wife, while still another could say they love peace. Outside of a biblical framework, love is relative; therefore, whether someone has their loving need met is relative. However, through the scope of God’s Word, love is an absolute truth. The Bible says in 1 John that “God is love.” The Bible also says in 1 John 4:10 that the most important thing to remember about love is that God loves us. This truth is completely contradictory to Maslow’s ideas. Another criticism is that Maslow’s theory of this hierarchy being topped off with the actualization of one’s self contradicts the Bible because of the theory’s egocentrism. The ultimate goal is self-centered according to Maslow (Romans 14:8).

Another problem that scripture has with Maslow’s idea of self-actualization is the idea of evangelizing the poor or the widow. God’s Word is not ignorant of the fact that people need food, physical health, and people in their lives to love. However, the infallible Bible also commands us to share Christ with people who do not have these needs satisfied in hope that they will have their number one need met which is being actualized in Christ. In Galatians 6:14, it says, “May I never boast except in the cross of Christ.” This addresses Maslow’s idea of a need for self-esteem which is an egocentric idea if put up against this scripture because it is sinful to be proud in one’s self and one’s accomplishments. If one is proud, he is not acknowledging in submission that he could do nothing without Christ (Philippians 4:13).

It is important to also address flaws and limitations of Maslow’s theory that are not simply negative due to the fact that they are not inherently Christian ideas. One such weakness is Maslow’s opinion that such concepts as “democratic character structure” and the “ability to love” are objective and “measurable” (Maslow 157). As discussed earlier, these ideas are anything but measurable using merely secular opinions and observations. Love and “uniqueness” are relative (Maslow 157). Self-actualization itself is subjective. There is a considerable lack of supportive empirical evidence for Maslow’s rigid view of what it means for someone to be self-actualizing. For these reasons, it is difficult to develop treatments and study those treatments’ effectiveness. Another strong criticism of Maslow as some psychologists and social scientists (namely Adler) would agree, as well as Christians as expounded upon before, is that the realization of one’s own self is not the ultimate achievement. Despite its flaws, Maslow’s theory as presented in his book was groundbreaking for the study of the human personality.

Works Cited

Goble, Frank G. The Third Force: The Psychology of Abraham Maslow. New York: Pocket Books, 1984.

Maslow, Abraham. Toward a Psychology of Being. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1968. 219 pp.