Content deleted Content added
creating archive 4 |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 63:
*Davies (1991). "[http://www.jstor.org/pss/3791750 Maslow and the theory of political development]". ''Political Psychology'' '''12'''(3).
*Nevis (1983). "[http://jab.sagepub.com/cgi/pdf_extract/19/3/249 Using an American perspective in understanding another culture: toward a heirarchy of needs for the People's Republic of China]". ''Journal of Applied Behavioral Science'' '''19'''(3).
<b class="IPA">[[Special:Contributions/Rjanag|r<
The real problem is if you read the original writings of the hierarchy of need they are read from the bottom up and sex was one of them not the presentation before us. What a crock of systematic sterilization of ideas. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/96.41.123.21|96.41.123.21]] ([[User talk:96.41.123.21|talk]]) 21:45, 18 May 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Line 122:
Most of the criticisms of Maslow are actually criticisms of the highly mechanical and schematised version of his theories represented by that pyramid.
The article does well in describing the popular understanding of Maslow's hierarchy - which is now an entity existing in it's own right in countless publications. It does not do well in describing Maslow's own ideas about the hi erarchy, or in showing that there are fundamental differences between how the hierarchy is commonly understood and taught, and how Maslow himself explained the concept. Lots of work needed here! [[User:Riversider2008|<strong
| |||