Perils of prosperity

[CraigD]

How does Maslow's theory account for suicide cults like Heaven's Gate or Solar Temple? Although these could be considered to represent the triangle's apex, they are also beneath it's base.

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs would place most cult members solidly at the middle (3rd) level of “social/love/belonging”. According to it, people must first have their level 1 creature needs, and their level 2 safety needs satisfied before they would be attracted to a cult. After having their social/love/belonging needs satisfied by the cult, they would begin to concentrate on their level 4 esteem needs.

 

According to the hiearchy, suicide cults “work” because, once one’s safety needs are satisfied, one must be persistently deprived of the feeling of safety for the need to reassert itself. When committing suicide, mass or otherwise, one typically does not feel physically deprived or unsafe. According to Maslow, if a suicide cult was deprived of food (level 1), or threatened with violence (level 2), it’s members would cease to focus on their belonging needs (level 3), and the cult would disband, or at least cease to be a cult.

[InfiniteNow]

How does Maslow's theory account for suicide cults like Heaven's Gate or Solar Temple? Although these could be considered to represent the triangle's apex, they are also beneath it's base.

My guess would put this at level 3, love and belonging.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow_pyramid#Love.2FBelonging_needs

 

Humans want to be accepted and to belong, whether it be to clubs, work groups, religious groups, family, gangs, etc. They need to feel loved (sexually and non-sexually) by others, and to be accepted by them. People also have a constant desire to feel needed. In the absence of these elements, people become increasingly susceptible to loneliness, social anxiety and depression.

[ughaibu]

Thanks for the replies. I'm still unclear as to how death can be considered as other than a threat to survival and safety, if it can, suicide would seem a natural and simple resolution of all stage one problems.

[ughaibu]

Another problem with assigning cults to stage three, is that the initial motivation for involvement with many cults, isn't social or group specific, the cult is viewed in terms of the individual's aims, as a means not an end, and the consequences of membership of notorious cults tend to be marginalisation or alienation by the member's existing social groups. An important feature of cult membership, is that it is composed of apparently unremarkable people, not of conspicuously lonely, seeker types.

[Turtle]

Interesting input indeed Turtle!

That reminds me of the temples and ashrams supported by many of such organizations in India.

 

The modus operandi is simple, amass a lot of wealth by fooling a lot of people, then spend (or should I say invest) a small portion of it to build structures so as the attract (fool?) still more.

 

Actually, the potlatch tradition includes more than material goods. People gave songs, stories, and new methods of doing work which everyone received and shared. Neither did anyone in the Native American tradition set up anything at all like the ashrams; particularly in the NW US and Western Canada, the people worked together to build large communal homes. I will find & post some relevant links.:)

 

 

Potlatches in the Yukon began a long time ago and helped codify rules of behavior required for a culture to survive. The potlatch provides a way to validate one's existence and status within a community.

 

People would plan these gatherings well in advance and would travel great distances to attend. Usually the potlatch was hosted and paid for by the crow clan or the wolf clan. People would save items, sometimes for years, to be given away as gifts at a potlatch. (Excerpts from Potlatch: The Southem Tuchone Way, Easterson 1992)

http://www.yfnta.org/todo/todo.htm#pot

 

Rifles, Blankets, & Beads

Identity, History, and the Northern Athapaskan Potlatch

By William E. Simeone

 

Volume 216 in the The Civilization of the American Indian Series

 

Whoever heard of a party at which the hosts lavishly give away presents, refusing to accept any gifts in return, keeping little for themselves? This is the custom of the Northern Athapaskan potlatch, a tradition that has long fascinated Americans. In Rifles, Blankets, and Beads, William E. Simeone explores the potlatch and its role in balancing competition and cooperation among the Tanacross people, a Northern Athapaskan culture.

http://www.oupress.com/bookdetail.asp?isbn=0-8061-3508-5

 

In their review of native discourse for the Handbook of North American Indians volume on Languages, Kinkade & Mattina suggest that there are eight main kinds of Native American discourses: myths and tales, sacred texts, historical narratives, speeches, poetry and songs, life histories (Kinkade & Mattina 1996:244). They also observe that the Northwest Coast may be unique in Native North America where "special tales are told of the origin of a specific family; such tales were used to validate the status of the family within the community and in relation to other families"(ibid. 270).

 

The summers were cool and rainy, and the winters mild. Ms Thunderbird's Ancestors spent the summer months collecting and preserving food, and during the winter months great ceremonies, the main one being the Potlatch, were hosted e.g.,(Tsimshian, Haida, Kwakwaka'wakw, Tlingit) up and down the coast. The Potlatch is often referred to as a traditional Gift-Giving ceremony. Wherein this is accurate as far as it goes, the Potlatch is much more than simply giving things away. The Potlatch (Chinook Trading Language meaning 'to give') was the Oral History and cultural grounding of the People of the Northwest coast. It was an event that brought people of many tribes together and was the legal and political system which defined First Nation's groups along the coast for thousands of years.

http://www.shannonthunderbird.com/Pacific%20Northwest%20Coast.htm

:cup:

[CraigD]

I'm still unclear as to how death can be considered as other than a threat to survival and safety, if it can, suicide would seem a natural and simple resolution of all stage one problems.

Death cannot be rationally considered other than a threat to personal survival, but human motivation, according to Masow’s hierarchy of needs or another psychological theory, is often not rational.

 

According to Maslow, a person struggling to avoid starvation or find a procreative mate (level 1), may risk their safety, A person who has satisfied these needs becomes focused on preserving what they have, and seeks safety (level 2). Neither are likely to solve there problem by killing themselves. A person struggling to gain love or social acceptance, on the other hand, may not only endanger their safety (more than a few of us have done this, I suspect), but may actually solve the problem with suicide (many of us with teenage and older children have witnessed and worried over this tendancy).

 

It’s practically a given in psychology that human behavior is not dominated by reason, though much effective psychotherapy attempts to treat mental dysfunction by teaching patients to be more rational.

[hallenrm]

I'm still unclear as to how death can be considered as other than a threat to survival and safety, if it can, suicide would seem a natural and simple resolution of all stage one problems.

 

I think that death (by suicide) is an escape route envisaged by deviant human beings, who somehow believe that they will be unable to satisfy their needs of level 3, 4 or 5. Which is not totally impossible. Such individuals take this escape route in the hope of far greater bliss after death. :Glasses:

[hallenrm]

Actually, the potlatch tradition includes more than material goods. People gave songs, stories, and new methods of doing work which everyone received and shared. Neither did anyone in the Native American tradition set up anything at all like the ashrams; particularly in the NW US and Western Canada, the people worked together to build large communal homes. I will find & post some relevant links.:Glasses:

I would consider these as fruits of poverty in contrast to perils of prosperity. In fact charitable actions are a part and parcel of almost all religions. I am reminded of christiam missionaries in tribal areas in India, who would undergo many hardships just to help the poor tribals. Similar is the tradition of Kar seva and langar

in sikh religion. One can infact find similar practices in almost all religions in the world, because all ancient religions have their roots in poverty, when it was essential to incultate the spirit of compassion. Newer practices like potlatch must have emerged when these practices were on the wane. For example sikhism is an offshhot of Hinduism when it became a tool to exploit the poor.

 

On the other hand I am yet to see a modern cult, the offshoots of prosperity, which targets the poor rather than the rich and when ever it apparetly sooms to be, it is advocated that it is playing the role of the Robinhood.

 

Otherwise most religiously minded people come out spontaneously when ever a tragedy strikes, like a tsunami, a serial bomb blasts ( like those witnessed in Mumbai) or the earthquakes in Gujrat. They contribute everything, in cash or kind, to help the needy without expecting anything in return, just like the potlatch practices quoted above.:doh:

[ughaibu]

CraigD: Maslow was attempting to provide an underlying system of rationality to human motivation, so I'm not convinced by irrationality as an explanation. Maslow's theory never struck me as particularly interesting or significant, so I'm not familiar with it's details, I had assumed that the triangle required the maintainance and support of each lower level, I dont really see how it can be otherwise, so I'm surprised that you seem to be presenting lower levels as losing importance once they've been achieved. Nevertheless, if that's how Maslow had conceived it, I can understand that aspect of your explanation.

 

Hallenrm: My question wasn't about suicide per se but about suicide cults.

[ughaibu]

Hallenrm: Have a look at Danny Wallace's "Join Me" cult.

http://www.join-me.co.uk/story.html

[hallenrm]

Hallenrm: Have a look at Danny Wallace's "Join Me" cult.

http://www.join-me.co.uk/story.html

 

Very interesting ugaibu, thanks once again for a useful link. Here is a quote from the web page

 

No, I owe a lot to the internet, word-of-mouth, and the genuine excitement of strangers. I can't explain why, in those early days, people were so keen to join something when they had no idea what it was they were joining. Perhaps it was a sense of fun. Perhaps it was a sense of adventure. Perhaps there was a fundamental human need to belong that I tapped into. Whatever it was, a small community was forming, and bonding. And I was loving it.

 

It goes on to prove my point that such cults breed on prosperity. Whether this particular cult will beneficial to the society atlarge or the cult leader alone, only time will tell. But, such cult really prove a point, people need such cults whether to satisfy their feeling of guilt (many youngsters often feel guilty of ignoring old people at home) or to circumvent the real fear (what will happen when I grow old?); or feeling a sense of satisfaction or pride of having done a small charitable act.

 

Very interesting indeed!:confused:

[ughaibu]

Hallenrm: You're still taking an overly simplistic view of cult phenomena. Join Me and Scientology are worlds apart, they have very few features in common, social prosperity is not a prerequisite for the existence of cults, have a look at "Jon Frum": http://enzo.gen.nz/jonfrum/

[hallenrm]

You are still missing my contention, ughaibu, I never contended that cult formation takes place in prosperous societies only, all the ancient religions are in fact some form of cults only. For example I said a couple of posts ago:

One can infact find similar practices in almost all religions in the world, because all ancient religions have their roots in poverty, when it was essential to incultate the spirit of compassion. Newer practices like potlatch must have emerged when these practices were on the wane. For example sikhism is an offshhot of Hinduism when it became a tool to exploit the poor.

What I contended is that most cults that we are witnessing mushrooming in many countries today are in fact have roots in the prosperity these countries are enjoying today.

 

Anyway the link you provided in the last post is mystereous indeed, shrouding the reality of the cult in clever trickestry.!

[ughaibu]

Sorry, you're right, I'm not sure what your point is.

Join Me isn't about exloiting the poor, that's why I brought it to your attention.

Cults arise in all countries and in all states of prosperity, and cults have all manner of ideologies and methods. Naturally, in larger societies, with greater individual prosperity, there will occur larger cults dealing with larger amounts of money.