An alternative view at needs and motivations

Yesterday I attended a symposium on needs, goals, and motivations. The introductory lecture was by Carol Dweck, followed by various perspectives based on Schema Therapy (e.g., Eskhol Rafaeli), CBT (e.g., Francesco Mancini), and Compassion Focused Therapy (e.g., Niki Petrocchi). I presented an alternative view of needs and motivations. My perspective was informed by evolutionary theory and aimed to offer a critical reading of these constructs. A special thanks to Maurizio Brasini who chaired the symposium and invited me.

In particular, I sought to emphasize two points. First, psychological constructs such as needs and motivations are created ex post to explain probabilistic processes such as natural and sexual selection. Defining general human functioning (e.g., personality) based on these low-order aspects risks making us forget a principle known since Gestaltpsychologie: the whole is not the sum of its parts.

Second, the phylogenetic trajectory of Homo sapiens is now primarily defined by cultural systems (which represent an analogue of genotypes), and many of the motivational models are almost exclusively consistent with Western cultural contexts—contexts where the individualistic, purposeful, and additive perspective on processes undoubtedly dominates.

This was an alternative view at needs and motivations of mine. A view rooted in an evolutionarily informed look at human personality.

The French philosopher François Julien, in discussing the effectiveness in East and West, cites two examples. On the one hand, Ulysses, who single-handedly resolved a decade-long war in one night. On the other, Sun Tzu, who saw the ideal of war as not taking the field. Perhaps what we think is certain is uncertain or undetermined.

For those interested, below is my presentation at the symposium: