I wouldn't classify social interaction as a need. There's plenty of examples of people without any human contact surviving, to the point that we have a well established word for these people; hermit.
Imperial Japanese holdouts after the end of WW2 are the classical example, and to a lesser degree you have hikikomori in modern day. The most extreme example is Christopher Thomas Knight (the North Pond Hermit) with only one claim instance of human interaction in that period; he said, "Hi" to a hiker.
A need has a specific meaning; more or less, you will die if you don't have water for more then a week. It doesn't matter how strong willed you are, lack of water will kill you. Lack of social interaction will not universally kill everyone.
> what happens to man's desires when there is plenty of bread and when his belly is chronically filled?
> At once other (and 'higher') needs emerge and these, rather than physiological hungers, dominate the organism. And when these in turn are satisfied, again new (and still 'higher') needs emerge and so on. This is what we mean by saying that the basic human needs are organized into a hierarchy of relative prepotency.
> One main implication of this phrasing is that gratification becomes as important a concept as deprivation in motivation theory, for it releases the organism from the domination of a relatively more physiological need, permitting thereby the emergence of other more social goals. The physiological needs, along with their partial goals, when chronically gratified cease to exist as active determinants or organizers of behavior. They now exist only in a potential fashion in the sense that they may emerge again to dominate the organism if they are thwarted. But a want that is satisfied is no longer a want. The organism is dominated and its behavior organized only by unsatisfied needs. If hunger is satisfied, it becomes unimportant in the current dynamics of the individual.
Basically, Maslow's definition of a "need" is "a human drive that acts as a determinant of behavior" and not purely in the sense of "a physiological requirement for survival".
You may disagree with his framework as presented (I do, but on psychoanalytic grounds, that it's overgeneralized, lacking a few steps in terms of how individuals interact with desire, and therefore only sociologically and not individually useful), but it seems difficult to argue humans lack "psychical needs" of some form beyond pure physiology.
In the case of hikikomori, recall that they spend a lot of time with media, creating "parasocial" relationships, or even on (usually anonymous) social media websites, which do offer a form of social interaction and connectedness. But there is a reason why very few individuals end up as genuine hermits, without any social interaction whatsoever.
Please review Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs [1]. I'm just communicating what he said in his book Motivation and Personality. His theory is taught in every introduction to psychology textbook.
somerandomqaguy|5 years ago
Imperial Japanese holdouts after the end of WW2 are the classical example, and to a lesser degree you have hikikomori in modern day. The most extreme example is Christopher Thomas Knight (the North Pond Hermit) with only one claim instance of human interaction in that period; he said, "Hi" to a hiker.
A need has a specific meaning; more or less, you will die if you don't have water for more then a week. It doesn't matter how strong willed you are, lack of water will kill you. Lack of social interaction will not universally kill everyone.
Nav_Panel|5 years ago
> what happens to man's desires when there is plenty of bread and when his belly is chronically filled?
> At once other (and 'higher') needs emerge and these, rather than physiological hungers, dominate the organism. And when these in turn are satisfied, again new (and still 'higher') needs emerge and so on. This is what we mean by saying that the basic human needs are organized into a hierarchy of relative prepotency.
> One main implication of this phrasing is that gratification becomes as important a concept as deprivation in motivation theory, for it releases the organism from the domination of a relatively more physiological need, permitting thereby the emergence of other more social goals. The physiological needs, along with their partial goals, when chronically gratified cease to exist as active determinants or organizers of behavior. They now exist only in a potential fashion in the sense that they may emerge again to dominate the organism if they are thwarted. But a want that is satisfied is no longer a want. The organism is dominated and its behavior organized only by unsatisfied needs. If hunger is satisfied, it becomes unimportant in the current dynamics of the individual.
Basically, Maslow's definition of a "need" is "a human drive that acts as a determinant of behavior" and not purely in the sense of "a physiological requirement for survival".
You may disagree with his framework as presented (I do, but on psychoanalytic grounds, that it's overgeneralized, lacking a few steps in terms of how individuals interact with desire, and therefore only sociologically and not individually useful), but it seems difficult to argue humans lack "psychical needs" of some form beyond pure physiology.
In the case of hikikomori, recall that they spend a lot of time with media, creating "parasocial" relationships, or even on (usually anonymous) social media websites, which do offer a form of social interaction and connectedness. But there is a reason why very few individuals end up as genuine hermits, without any social interaction whatsoever.
richardbrevig|5 years ago
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs