Self-actualisation

Part 1 of a 2-part article about the concept of self-actualisation and the actualising tendency

Jan 11, 2026

The concept of self-actualisation has got a bad rap recently. It’s been distorted by Silicon Valley tech-bros who mistake the pursuit of power for genuine authenticity.

It’s been co-opted by bio-hackers, podcasters and influencers who market a viscerally vapid form of self-determination.

But what is self-actualisation? When so many people are ‘surviving their survival’, is it either realistic or preferable?

Some critics have seen Maslow’s concept of self-actualisation to be mired by individualism and socio-economic blindness. However, Maslow consistently argued that it is only by becoming our true, authentic selves that we are able to move beyond the self and turn outward, meeting the wider world with compassion for humanity as a whole.

So is the self-actualisation concept largely redundant, or could it actually provide us with a way out of personal and political turmoil?

Where it began

The idea of self-actualisation appeared as part of the ‘third force’ of psychotherapy, known as the humanistic approach. It emerged in the 1960s as an alternative to psychoanalysis, with humanistic thinkers (such as Rollo May, Carl Rogers, Eugene Gendlin, Karen Horney and R.D. Laing), favouring a holistic perspective, which saw the individual as capable of insight, creativity and higher potential.

In the humanistic approach, qualities such as authenticity, self-awareness, responsibility, freedom, meaning and growth are given importance. The emphasis is on a person’s ability to make constructive life choices in the hope of igniting an innate, self-fulfilling potentiality.

Maslow

Maslow and the other humanistic thinkers were (quite reasonably) critical of Freud and psychoanalysis, for the tendency to highlight dysfunction and draw universal conclusions from the malfunctioning parts of the psyche. Maslow was critical of the focus on neurosis and anxiety at the expense of exploring the greater manifestations of humanity, including joy and creativity.

Instead, Maslow focused on people he considered “self-actualising,” studying how they differed from others. He found that such individuals could perceive people and reality with a high degree of accuracy and efficiency because their ideas were not based on fear, anxiety, fantasy, pessimism or optimism. He found they had a large degree of self-acceptance, were spontaneous and natural, and were autonomous and highly ethical. They typically led meaning-centred and purposeful lives, were growth-motivated and exploratory, and had a deep feeling for others. They were also highly creative thinkers with a philosophical sense of humour about life.

Importantly, despite sharing many of these qualities, each person remained distinctly themselves.

According to Maslow, self-actualisation is the desire for and realisation of an individual’s potential, marked by a deep appreciation for and engagement with one’s own life, a “desire for self-fulfilment…to become everything that one is capable of becoming” (Maslow 1954, p.46). He viewed the goal of psychotherapy as the integration of the self and self-actualisation (in its most complete form), as the discovery of one’s personal purpose in life.

Hierarchy of Needs

His much-discussed and often misrepresented Hierarchy of Needs places self-actualisation at the top of the hierarchy. As such, self-actualisation assumes the gratification of what Maslow (2014, p.29) defined as the ‘basic needs’, including physiological concerns (food, shelter, warmth), in addition to health, love, safety, connection, belonging and esteem.

“That is to say”, said Maslow (1954, p.50), “that all subjects felt safe and un-anxious, accepted, loved and loving, respect-worthy and respected.”

This theory is, of course, entirely problematic. As a developmental psychologist, Maslow would have known that feeling safe, loved, and respect-worthy are temporary states that, with any luck, we can access more frequently than not.

Furthermore, his use of the term ‘hierarchy’ was misleading. Maslow saw these needs as integrated and interdependent, meaning that regression or fluid movement between the needs is a given. As such, it is a gross misrepresentation of how human functioning works to attribute needs as a pecking order or ladder to climb. This idea lends itself to the notion of a growth model, or the idea that a human being is a project to be “optimised”.

And this is exactly what happened when Maslow’s ideas were re-interpreted by the corporate world. Maslow never intended for his hierarchy to be portrayed as a pyramid, an idea created by consultants and corporate teams who commercialised Maslow’s concept.

In reality, Maslow’s study of self-actualisation was an attempt to define what a psychologically “healthy” person looks like. He believed that human nature is fundamentally good, and that cruelty and spite arise as defensive responses to unmet needs for safety, self-esteem, and affection.

What Maslow was getting at is that, under the right conditions, our basic needs are integrated and help mobilise growth into our potential. However, as Kaufman points out: “Another implication here is that if you try to grow too soon without a healthy integration of your insecurities and deprivations, the growth is less likely to reach its full height” (Kaufman, 2021).

A 21st-century approach

Given that Maslow was a highly privileged white man writing in the mid-20th century, his framework needs to be re-examined and revised to reflect the realities of women’s lives in the 21st century.

Financial instability, physical danger, discrimination, and abuse are challenges that most women face at some point, and these experiences can reshape neural pathways and life trajectories. It’s striking that so many women—especially women of colour, working-class women, refugee and trans women—are often denied the fundamental needs of security, safety, and respect that Maslow identified as the ‘basic’ or ‘deficiency needs’.

The psychological disruption caused by a lack of basic security makes the pursuit of higher growth goals not impossible, but certainly far more difficult. How can a woman devote herself to creating great art or solving complex scientific problems while fearing for her safety or worrying about paying the rent?

Modern science has shown that unpredictability destabilises how we view ourselves and our world. Conversely, feeling secure is associated with coherence and confidence in oneself and one’s environment, allowing an individual to take risks and explore new ideas and ways of being (Kaufman 2021, p.7). Having a sense of safety is strongly tied to the feeling that one’s existence matters, that we are important and valuable.

As a therapist, I would suggest that every woman should re-interpret Maslow’s hierarchy on their own terms and by taking into account their own authenticity and ideas about freedom, safety and respect.

For example, what are the conditions in your life that need to be met so that you can do your best creative work? For some, creating may depend on having a loving family and stable home life, or a supportive creative community. This would mean repositioning ‘love and belonging’ to give them the same baseline importance as ‘security and safety’.

I would also suggest looking at the hierarchy and choosing areas you would like to work on. For instance, someone may feel that they have their physiological needs met, and their relationships in a healthy place, but their employment or finances are not as stable or fulfilling as they would like.

As we are integrated, holistic beings, a challenge in one area will invariably impact another. A lack of confidence may underpin many other issues a person may see showing up in their lives. For example, low self-esteem may be holding you back from showing up more fully in relationships and asking for what you need (love and belonging). Or a lack of confidence may be preventing you from progressing in your career (safety and security).

Or perhaps you have different priorities entirely from Maslow? In which case, I would urge you to rewrite the Hierarchy of Needs with your own design and from your own perspective.

I have been inspired by Chinese artist Jiang Qiong Er’s artwork entitled ‘XII Calls’ to reimagine Maslow’s concept. Each of her bronze sculptures, inspired by mythical creatures from ancient civilisations, embody 12 different universal values: Bravery, Wisdom, Equality, Nature, Fraternity, Exploration, Time, Inclusion, Benevolence, Authenticity, Peace and Freedom.

Working with this new idea, we might take each theme and explore it in relation to our own lives. For example, how much peace do I have in my life right now? Where am I showing up with bravery? What is my relationship to time? To nature? How can I cultivate more authenticity and freedom? Taking each of these 12 themes and journaling about them can reveal so much more about our values and what we desire in our internal and external worlds.

It also dispels corporate notions of hierarchy from the concept. Instead, it uses a more feminine and universal way to look at parts of ourselves and our lives to see where we may elicit growth. In this way, we may find a more holistic path to self-actualisation and fulfilling one’s potential.

Conclusion

One of the greatest criticisms of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs can be evidenced by the many women around the world who continue to conduct ethical lives, carry out deep relationships, explore their growth potential, and be informed by a need to help others, in defiance of a lack of physical safety, economic security and autonomy. In other words, many women achieve self-actualisation despite not having their basic needs met.

Adichie quotes Wangari Maathai when she says: “The higher you go, the fewer women there are” (We Should All Be Feminists, 2013). And yet the further you climb Maslow’s hierarchy, the more women you find, even despite the great odds.

Women make up half of the world, and yet globally are paid 24% less than men (Oxfam 2025). Imagine a world in which the basic needs of women are provided, and what those women may be able to innovate when those deficiency needs are met?

In part 2 of this series, I explore what may be a more relevant and useful development of Maslow’s concept of self-actualisation. Psychotherapist Carl Rogers used Maslow’s ideas to inform his theory of the actualising tendency— the innate building blocks we have to become a fully functioning person.

References:

Adiche, C.N (2013). We Should All Be Feminists. Video, TEDx Euston. Available at:

Kaufman, S. (2021). Transcend: The New Science of Self-actualization. United States: John Murray Press / TarcherPerigee. Kindle Edition.

Maslow, A.H (1954). Motivation And Personality. Delhi: Prabhat Books. Kindle Edition, 2015.

Maslow, A.H (2014). Toward a Psychology of Being. Virginia: Wilder Publications / Sublime Books.

Oxfam 2025. Available at: https://www.oxfam.org/en/why-majority-worlds-poor-are-women [Accessed 16th December, 2025].

Rogers, C. (1961). On Becoming a Person: a therapist’s view of psychotherapy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.