Human Needs: How May the Nature of 'Desire' be Considered As a Problem?

Jack Cummins

I struggle with this area and see it as a complex area of philosophy. On one hand, there is Maslow's hierarchy of needs, which begins from the physiological, progressing to the social needs and with the need for self-actualization at the upper spectrum. Often, this is interpreted to mean that the basic survival needs are foremost before the higher needs. Self actualization, creativity and spiritual needs are seen as that which may be accomplished after basic needs are fulfilled. However, I am not sure that Maslow saw it as straightforward as he emphasised the importance of self-actualization and creativity.

I am also writing this thread with an interest in the Buddhist emphasis on the way in which 'desires' are seen as something to be overcome. The area of desires, wants, attachments and higher aspirations represents a challenge for human beings. To what extent are desires an essential aspect of the human condition, based on physiological and psychological aspects of human nature? To what extent can 'desires' be overcome and how important is this in human life and the ongoing evolution of human consciousness?

Jack Cummins

Having written this thread, I am wondering how this issue relates to the nature of evolution of consciousness. For some lifeforms the survival instincts and procreation are the ultimate. Social aspects of life may be important for some lifeforms.

However, it is in the human kingdom that self-actualization is most apparent and, so it can be asked does this figures in the larger scope of human evolution? Also, it is within the human realm that the idea of going beyond 'desire' becomes a possibility. How significant is this in the evolution of consciousness? What does the idea of 'desire' represent in the pathways of evolutionary potential?

T Clark

↪Jack Cummins

Here are some thoughts from the Tao Te Ching - Stefan Stenudd’s translation.

Verse 44

Your name or your body,
What is dearer?
Your body or your wealth,
What is worthier?
Gain or loss,
What is worse?

Greed is costly.
Assembled fortunes are lost.
Those who are content suffer no disgrace.
Those who know when to halt are unharmed.
They last long.

Verse 46
When the Way governs the world,
The proud stallions drag dung carriages.
When the Way is lost to the world,
War horses are bred outside the city.

There is no greater crime than desire.
There is no greater disaster than discontent.
There is no greater misfortune than greed.

Therefore:
To have enough of enough is always enough.

My take on this - Desire for accomplishment, acclaim, status, wealth distracts us, makes it harder to be aware of, our Te, our intrinsic virtuosities, the voice inside us.

Chuang Tzu wrote - “ What I call sharp hearing is not hearkening to others, but rather hearkening to oneself, nothing more.”

180 Proof

To what extent are desires an essential aspect of the human condition, based on physiological and psychological aspects of human nature? — Jack Cummins

"Desires" seem, at least, biologically indispensible.

To what extent can 'desires' be overcome and how important is this in human life and the ongoing evolution of human consciousness?

If by "overcome" you mean controlled, then, to the degree "desires" are not pathological, then I suspect they can be detached from their objects (or sublimated) by ascetic techniques or behavioral conditioning or some types of neurosurgery.

Also, it is within the human realm that the idea of going beyond 'desire' becomes a possibility. How significant is this in the evolution of consciousness? — Jack Cummins

Essentially, that's disembodiment, which I don't think is "a possibility". "Desire" is to body forth (i.e. being a body). Also", I don't think, or see how, "consciousness" can "evolve". Clarify what you mean ...

What does the idea of 'desire' represent in the pathways of evolutionary potential?

I suppose that depends on the culture within which "the idea of desire" is "represented".

Jack Cummins

↪180 Proof

Yes, the biological aspects of 'desire' is important and Maslow's hierarchy of needs begins with the physical. It involves the spectrum of animal and human sentient existence. One aspect which this, which Maslow may not go into enough detail about is sexual desire. This involves both the physiological and the psychological components of love and attachment.

In the Western philosophy tradition, this has been an area of great challenge, ranging from Kantian puritanism, to Gnostic celebration of the body, and the postmodern deconstruction of all such ideas.

This is where the cultural aspects come into play, as seen from the larger sphere of pluralistic understanding. The singular philosophies of desire, especially within spiritual perspectives, relate back to cultural values.Here, there is so much disagreement, especially at the core of underlying ethical values.

Jack Cummins

↪T Clark

I should probably read the 'Tao de Ching' asi I have seen it referred to a lot on this forum in the past. It probably represents a far 'softer' form of thinking than in Western philosophy.

I am also interested in Tantric Tantric understanding of sexuality and the nature of human awareness. One concept at the core of this, is 'kundalini', such as that spoken about by Gopi Krishna. Of course, it may be regarded, or disregarded, as esoteric. But, the understanding of the nature of desire may hinge on how one sees the physical and the nature of sensory reality.

T Clark

. It probably represents a far 'softer' form of thinking than in Western philosophy. — Jack Cummins

The way I think about it is that eastern philosophy looks inward and western philosophy looks outward.

Jack Cummins

↪T Clark

I can see that the dichotomy between inwards and outwards exist to some extent. However, the panorama of this may be a little more complex, especially in the ideas of Western philosophy and otherwise. I see both looking inwards and outwards as integral aspects, and wonder how it can be put together systematically. Of course, this would involve strengths and weaknesses in thinking in perspectives.

T Clark

I can see that the dichotomy between inwards and outwards exist to some extent. However, the panorama of this may be a little more complex, — Jack Cummins

Sure, I was generalizing to get my point across. But I still think that generalization tells something significant about the differences between the two styles of philosophy.

Jack Cummins

↪T Clark

I have big issues in thinking about the nature of inner and outer reality..The inner perspective is a way of focusing on the outer, but it is not absolute, because it may hold limitations of others's perspectives. It may end up with a form of philosophy shoegazing. Being able to look within and outwards simultaneously, in thinking of needs, self and others may be an intricate process in thinking about the experience of needs.

T Clark

I have big issues in thinking about the nature of inner and outer reality..The inner perspective is a way of focusing on the outer, but it is not absolute, because it may hold limitations of others's perspectives. It may end up with a form of philosophy shoegazing. Being able to look within and outwards simultaneously, in thinking of needs, self and others may be an intricate process in thinking about the experience of needs. — Jack Cummins

This will probably just confuse things, but I have come to think that all philosophy is inward looking, introspection. Everything we do here is looking at ourselves, self awareness. When we think we are looking out into the world, we are really only looking at ourselves, looking out at the world.

This probably is not the right place to take this any further. I don’t want to distract from your thread.

Human Needs: How May the Nature of 'Desire' be Considered As a Problem?

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions