192 Christopher R. Bell
and commendable self. In contrast to Rogers, Maslow conceives of the
notion of self-actualization as a process of progressively addressing one’s
most immediate needs before moving on to address ‘higher’ needs.
However, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs has been routinely criticized from a
Cultural Psychology perspective for positing self-actualization as a
universal human need rather than as a contingent cultural value reflecting
the individualistic ideals of Western culture. Regarding this point, Dumont
(2010) notes:
Locus of control and self-actualization relate to a panoply of other
value-laden Western “virtues,” such as inner-directedness or autonomy,
optimism, extraversion, self-affirmation, creativity, independence, and
gregariousness. Collectivist societies do not by and large resonate to these
views. Pedersen cites Rigney, who has highlighted the fact that in many
traditional cultures the Maslow hierarchy of needs, as an example, is
totally inappropriate: “Placing self-actualization at the top of the so-called
hierarchy is simply incorrect for my people. We are who we are because
of our relations with the group.” To these peoples of Southeast Asia,
Japan, China, and Korea, these personality traits bespeak of self-
centeredness that group-centered cultures find uncongenial if not
repugnant. (p. 246-247)Similar to Freud’s metapsychology that locates contradiction as an
internal property of the psyche rather than a reflection or expression of
external social contradictions, Humanistic Psychology’s approach to
personality and motivation has also been critiqued from a Critical
Psychology perspective for psychologizing (i.e., positing as universal and
internal aspects of the human psyche) contingent and external social
contradictions prevalent at the time of its theorization. Allan R. Buss
(1979) argues that Maslow’s individually focused hierarchy of needs with
its goals of self-actualization and self-transcendence is not a descriptive
science but rather a normative and value-laden liberal ideological response
to the socially conservative implications of Freudian pessimism and
Behaviorist determinism. Buss (1979) states, “To the liberal mind,
freedom, liberty and personal development or progress were ideals that