You've hit the nail on the head as far as I'n concerned. — Agent Smith

The sentence "You" can live without self-actualization; "for me" it's essential." was not to be taken as specifically applicable to you. I was just observing that other people's actualization tends to be less interesting than our own.

So, "self-actualization" isn't going to look the same for everyone, and for an individual won't be the same throughout life. I have had periods of really good self-actualization, and periods which were barren. This seems to be true for most people. A couple of big peaks were in work settings, a few minor peaks were in interpersonal relationships. The present time, particularly the last 10 years (after age 65, basically) has been an extended period of self-actualization. — Bitter Crank

:up: Count yourself lucky. Many are still struggling with poverty.

what are your best self-actualizing experiences? — Bitter Crank

I'm afraid I don't know what my personal, very own, self-actualization is. I suspect Maslow used a very general term (self-actualization) as an acknowledgement of different strokes for different folks. I envy people who know exactly what they want. Below is a transcript from a TikTok video.

Question: What do you want in life?
Answer: Money.
Question: Yes, but what is the essence of your life?
Answer: Money.
Question: Ok, let's set money aside for the moment. What is the meaning of your life?
Answer:. The money that you set aside.

:smile:

Come to think of it I find it quite odd that even those for whom physiological needs are of little concern because they're affluent end up simply, what I would call, upgrading their physiological needs i.e. instead of a simple meal, they chow down on haute cuisine. instead of cheap clothes, it's Armani, instead of a hut, it's a mansion, and so on. Self-actualization then is nothing more than buying more expensive food, clothes, houses, etc. You see what I mean?

Self-actualization then is nothing more than buying more expensive food, clothes, houses, etc. You see what I mean? — Agent Smith

In Maslow's theory of motivation, gratification of basic needs is not isolated from the cognitive activity necessary for a healthy organism. While the aesthetic element of eating can be a source of gratification, the restless nature of the organism's intellect is key for experiencing an "actualization." In that vein, Maslow observes:

Studies of psychologically healthy people indicate that they are, as a defining characteristic, attracted to the mysterious, to the unknown, to the chaotic, unorganized and unexplained. This seems to be a per se attractiveness; these areas are in themselves and of their own right interesting. The contrasting reaction to the well known is boredom.

There follows a long paragraph discussing how this characteristic has psychopathological or neurotic outcomes. And then he says:

I have seen a few cases in which it seemed clear to me that the pathology (boredom, loss of zest in life, self-dislike, general depression of the bodily functions, steady deterioration of the intellectual life of tastes, etc.) were produced in intelligent people leading stupid lives in stupid jobs. I have at least one case in which the appropriate cognitive therapy (resuming part time studies, getting a position that was more intellectually demanding, insight) removed the symptoms. — A Maslow, A Theory of Human Motivation, pg 49

This example suggests that satisfying 'higher' needs becomes more personal and various in their expressions but the dynamic of what makes them healthy or sick is the same for all humans.

:ok: I'm watching this video series on the history of mathematics and according to it the 17^th & 18^th centuries were characterized by mathematicians seeking wealthy patrons (rich noblemen & royalty); a symbiotic relationship exemplified by the Bernouilli-L'Hôpital rule (calculus). Self-actualization vicariously achieved much like how the super-rich in present times finance research (Bill Gates Foundation for example).

Self-actualization vicariously achieved much like how the super-rich in present times finance research (Bill Gates Foundation for example). — Agent Smith

So parasitism?

So parasitism? — _db

No, I don't think so. Both parties benefit. The poor intellectual's basic physiological needs + more are met with the help of a rich patron who, in turn, gains bragging rights for his contribution to STEM.