Once a week.
Subscribe to our weekly newsletter.
9 self-actualized historical figures
When he was developing his famous hierarchy of needs, Abraham Maslow cited 9 historical figures that achieved self-actualization.
- In order to develop his model of self-actualization, Abraham Maslow interviewed friends, colleagues, students, and historical figures.
- These 9 historical figures demonstrate different aspects of self-actualization that Maslow believed all self-actualized individuals possessed to one degree or another.
- By studying these figures, we can come to a better understanding of what self-actualization really is.
Most, by now, are familiar with Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs. The model describes a series of successive, basic needs that must be satisfied before a human being can concern themselves with the next level. One needs to eat before one can worry about safety, one needs to feel safe before seeking out belonging, one needs to feel love and belonging before one can establish self-esteem, and one needs to have self-esteem before they can reach the pinnacle of the hierarchy, self-actualization.
In his most comprehensive book on the subject, Motivation and Personality, Maslow described self-actualization as the "full use and exploitation of talents, capacities, etc. Such people seem to be fulfilling themselves and to be doing the best that they are capable of doing. […] They are people who have developed or are developing to the full stature of which they are capable."
To develop this definition, Maslow studied friends, colleagues, college students, as well as 9 historical figures that he believed had become self-actualized. The qualities of these figures, he argued, could shed light on the qualities of self-actualized individuals in general. Though they all share characteristics of self-actualized people to one degree or another, some stand out more than others.
1. Abraham Lincoln
Portrait of Abraham Lincoln
Stock Montage/Getty Images
Abraham Lincoln could be said to represent many of the qualities of self-actualized people, but Maslow called him out for one in particular: a philosophical, unhostile sense of humor. "Probably," wrote Maslow, "Lincoln never made a joke that hurt anybody else; it is also likely that many or even most of his jokes had something to say, had a function beyond just producing a laugh. They often seemed to be education in a more palatable form, akin to parables or fables."
In his book, Reminiscences of Abraham Lincoln, author David B. Locke wrote, "But with all the humor in his nature, which was more than humor because it was humor with a purpose (that constituting the difference between humor and wit) […] His flow of humor was a sparkling spring gushing out of a rock – the flashing water had a somber background which made it all the brighter."
2. Thomas Jefferson
Today, Thomas Jefferson's historical legacy is a bit mixed. Having argued that all men are created equal, his position as a slave-owner seems contradictory. Still, Maslow considered Jefferson to be a self-actualized person, perhaps because of Jefferson's "democratic character structure," though this may be the result of the thinking of 20th century historians in regards to Jefferson's slavery practices.
Self-actualized people, wrote Maslow, possess a "hard-to-get-at-tendency to give a certain quantum of respect to any human being just because he is a human individual; our subjects seem not to wish to go beyond a certain minimum point, even with scoundrels, of demeaning. of derogating, of robbing of dignity."
This is certainly reflected in Jefferson's most famous piece of writing, the Declaration of Independence, which contended that all men possess unalienable rights. It is, however, more difficult to square with his ambivalent position on slavery. Throughout his life, Jefferson expressed his dislike of slavery and introduced anti-slavery legislation, yet he owned over 600 slaves and freed only 7. He also believed blacks to be inferior — in this regard, Maslow may have picked a poor candidate.
3. Albert Einstein
Maslow argued that self-actualized people are firmly grounded in the real world, rather than the miasma of stereotypes, abstractions, expectations, and biases that most of us experience. "They are therefore far more apt to perceive what is there rather than their own wishes, hopes, fears, anxieties, their own theories and beliefs, or those of their cultural group," he wrote.
Maslow argued that many excellent scientists possess this quality and that it drives them to learn more about the unknown, the ambiguous, and the unstructured. Most people like stability and are disturbed when reality doesn't seem to reflect that desired stability. In this regard, Einstein is very much the opposite; he once said "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all art and science."
4. Eleanor Roosevelt
Eleanor Roosevelt, wife of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and First Lady of the United States from 1933 to 1945, holds up the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Eleanor Roosevelt best exemplified the quality that Maslow called Gemeinshaftsgefuhl, a kind of psychologically healthy social connectedness and concern for other's well-being, even — or especially — when other's behavior is disgraceful or disappointing. Roosevelt was an extremely productive humanitarian and much loved for it. She has been described as "the First Lady of the World" and "the object of almost universal respect," and for good reason. Roosevelt was one of the earliest advocates for the civil rights of African Americans, spoke out against the discrimination of Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor, and oversaw the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
5. Jane Addams
As an early feminist, social worker, and pacifist, Jane Addams best represents the sense of morality that Maslow believed self-actualized people to possess. To Maslow, the self-actualized individual "rarely showed in their day-to-day living the chaos, the confusion, the inconsistency, or the conflict that are so common in the average person's ethical dealings."
Addams fought for women's right to vote, documented the impact of typhoid fever on the poor, and worked diligently to bring an end to World War I, despite considerable criticism from the public after the U.S. joined the war. Rather than succumb to public pressure, however, Addams maintained her position, in part due to the innate moral compass that self-actualized individuals possess. Because of her work, she was rewarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1931.
6. William James
Stock Montage/Getty Images
Known as the "father of American psychology," William James serves as an example of self-actualized people's ability to accept the self, nature, and others. In 1875, James offered the very first U.S. course in psychology. Prior to James, serious research into the function of the human mind was scant in the U.S.
As a young man, James experienced depression himself and often contemplated suicide. "I originally studied medicine in order to be a physiologist," wrote James, "but I drifted into psychology and philosophy from a sort of fatality." In seeking to understand the human mind, James fits the bill for self-actualized people's ability to accept the world around them without bias or prejudice. Maslow wrote that self-actualized individuals "see human nature as it is and not as they would prefer it to be. Their eyes see what is before them without being strained through spectacles of various sorts to distort or shape or color the reality."
The nineteenth century is often referred to as the "asylum era," where a large number of mentally ill individuals were locked up, mainly to be ignored and forgotten about. The work of early psychologists like James helped to dismantle this practice.
7. Albert Schweitzer
Self-actualized people, wrote Maslow, "customarily have some mission in life, some task to fulfill, some problem outside themselves which enlists much of their energies." Polymath and Nobel Peace Prize recipient Albert Schweitzer best exemplifies this quality.
In addition to being an accomplished theologian, Schweitzer was a driven medical missionary, returning to what is now the country of Gabon (then a French colony) twice to establish a functional hospital. The hospital was desperately needed, as Schweitzer saw more than 2,000 patients in his first nine months there, treating leprosy, yellow fever, malaria, and many other diseases.
The fact that Maslow selected Schweitzer as indicative of the superlative qualities of self-actualized people reflects mid-century American attitudes, too: Schweitzer would later be criticized as having a somewhat racist, paternalistic attitude towards the Africans he treated, reflected through statements like "The African is indeed my brother, but my junior brother." Though the good Schweitzer brought to the world is undisputable, his personal attitudes may not truly reflect those of the self-actualized individual.
8. Aldous Huxley
ullstein bild/ullstein bild via Getty Images
Another quality that Maslow argued self-actualized people presented was frequent "peak" or "mystical" experiences. These were moments of ecstasy and awe that conveyed "the feeling of being simultaneously more powerful and also more helpless than one ever was before" and "the conviction that something extremely important and valuable had happened."
For science fiction writer Aldous Huxley, pursuing mystical experiences was central to his work. Not only did his most famous work, Brave New World, criticize the pursuit of superficial pleasures, Huxley also pursued deep experiences through the use of psychedelic drugs like mescaline and LSD. He wrote about his psychedelic experiences in The Doors to Perception. Regarding these experiences, Huxley wrote "The mystical experience is doubly valuable; it is valuable because it gives the experiencer a better understanding of himself and the world and because it may help him to lead a less self-centered and more creative life."
9. Baruch Spinoza
Baruch Spinoza was a 17th century philosopher who demonstrated the kind of autonomy and independence of culture that Maslow claims self-actualized individuals to possess. "Self-actualizing people," he wrote, "are not dependent for their main satisfactions on the real world, or other people or culture or means to ends or, in general, on extrinsic satisfactions. Rather they are dependent for their own development and continued growth on their own potentialities and latent resources."
Spinoza worked against the grain of the dominant culture at the time. For his rationalist philosophy and theological criticism, the Jewish community issued a cherem against him, similar to excommunication in Christianity.
His works in philosophy are today considered foundational to metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics, though his greatest work, Ethics, was published after his death in 1677. This work established him as one of the Enlightenment's great thinkers, and despite being a somewhat famous philosopher prior to this, Spinoza lived a modest life as a lens grinder. He turned down being named the heir of his friend, Simon de Vries, turned down a prestigious academic position at the University of Heidelberg, and doggedly persisted in writing a work of biblical criticism that advocated for a secular, constitutional government, despite a possible threat to his life. Although he was despised by many in his own time, even his enemies admitted that he lived "a saintly life."
The young man died nearly 2,000 years ago in the volcanic eruption that buried Pompeii.
- A team of researchers in Italy discovered the intact brain cells of a young man who died in the Mount Vesuvius eruption in A.D. 79.
- The brain's cell structure was visible to researchers (who used an electron microscope) in a glassy, black material found inside the man's skull.
- The material was likely the victim's brain preserved through the process of vitrification in which the intense heat followed by rapid cooling turned the organ to glass.
Almost 2,000 years ago, Mount Vesuvius — located on the gulf of what is today Naples in Campania, Italy — erupted, burying the ancient cities of Herculaneum and Pompeii beneath hot ash.
Recently, a team of researchers in Italy discovered the intact brain cells of a young man who died in the disaster in A.D. 79. The team studied remains that were first unearthed in the 1960s from Herculaneum, a city once nestled into the shadow of Mount Vesuvius. The man was around 25 years old when he perished and was discovered lying face-down on a wooden bed in Herculaneum's Collegium Augustalium (the College of the Augustales), located near the city's main street. The building was the headquarters of the cult of Emperor Augustus who was worshipped as a deity, a common Roman tradition at the time.
Discovery of cells
Electron microscope image of brain axons.
Credit: PLOS ONE
Now, subsequent research has described how the researchers, using an electron microscope, discovered cells in the vitrified brain. According to Petrone they were "incredibly well preserved with a resolution that is impossible to find anywhere else." Additionally, the team used another method called energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy to determine the chemical compounds of the glassy material. The sample was rich in carbon and oxygen, which indicates that it was organic. The researchers compared those ancient proteins to a database of proteins found in the human brain, and found that all of the discovered proteins are indeed present in human brain tissue.
Additionally, Petrone and his team suspect they also discovered vitrified nerve cells in the ancient victim's spinal cord and cerebellum based on the position of the sample in the mind of the skull and the concentration of the proteins.
These impeccable preservations of brain tissue are unprecedented and will undoubtedly open the door to new and exciting research opportunities on these ancient people and civilizations that weren't possible until now.
The Italian research team will continue to study the remains to learn more about the vitrification process, including the precise temperatures the victims were exposed to and the cooling rate of the ash. They also, according to Petrone, want to analyze proteins from the remains and their related genes.
New data have set the particle physics community abuzz.
- The first question ever asked in Western philosophy, "What's the world made of?" continues to inspire high energy physicists.
- New experimental results probing the magnetic properties of the muon, a heavier cousin of the electron, seem to indicate that new particles of nature may exist, potentially shedding light on the mystery of dark matter.
- The results are a celebration of the human spirit and our insatiable curiosity to understand the world and our place in it.
If brute force doesn't work, then look into the peculiarities of nothingness. This may sound like a Zen koan, but it's actually the strategy that particle physicists are using to find physics beyond the Standard Model, the current registry of all known particles and their interactions. Instead of the usual colliding experiments that smash particles against one another, exciting new results indicate that new vistas into exotic kinds of matter may be glimpsed by carefully measuring the properties of the quantum vacuum. There's a lot to unpack here, so let's go piecemeal.
It is fitting that the first question asked in Western philosophy concerned the material composition of the world. Writing around 350 BCE, Aristotle credited Thales of Miletus (circa 600 BCE) with the honor of being the first Western philosopher when he asked the question, "What is the world made of?" What modern high energy physicists do, albeit with very different methodology and equipment, is to follow along the same philosophical tradition of trying to answer this question, assuming that there are indivisible bricks of matter called elementary particles.
Deficits in the Standard Model
Jumping thousands of years of spectacular discoveries, we now have a very neat understanding of the material composition of the world at the subatomic level: a total of 12 particles and the Higgs boson. The 12 particles of matter are divided into two groups, six leptons and six quarks. The six quarks comprise all particles that interact via the strong nuclear force, like protons and neutrons. The leptons include the familiar electron and its two heavier cousins, the muon and the tau. The muon is the star of the new experiments.
For all its glory, the Standard Model described above is incomplete. The goal of fundamental physics is to answer the most questions with the least number of assumptions. As it stands, the values of the masses of all particles are parameters that we measure in the laboratory, related to how strongly they interact with the Higgs. We don't know why some interact much stronger than others (and, as a consequence, have larger masses), why there is a prevalence of matter over antimatter, or why the universe seems to be dominated by dark matter — a kind of matter we know nothing about, apart from the fact that it's not part of the recipe included in the Standard Model. We know dark matter has mass since its gravitational effects are felt in familiar matter, the matter that makes up galaxies and stars. But we don't know what it is.
Whatever happens, new science will be learned.
Physicists had hoped that the powerful Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland would shed light on the nature of dark matter, but nothing has come up there or in many direct searches, where detectors were mounted to collect dark matter that presumably would rain down from the skies and hit particles of ordinary matter.
Could muons fill in the gaps?
Enter the muons. The hope that these particles can help solve the shortcomings of the Standard Model has two parts to it. The first is that every particle, like a muon, that has an electric charge can be pictured simplistically as a spinning sphere. Spinning spheres and disks of charge create a magnetic field perpendicular to the direction of the spin. Picture the muon as a tiny spinning top. If it's rotating counterclockwise, its magnetic field would point vertically up. (Grab a glass of water with your right hand and turn it counterclockwise. Your thumb will be pointing up, the direction of the magnetic field.) The spinning muons will be placed into a doughnut-shaped tunnel and forced to go around and around. The tunnel will have its own magnetic field that will interact with the tiny magnetic field of the muons. As the muons circle the doughnut, they will wobble about, just like spinning-tops wobble on the ground due to their interaction with Earth's gravity. The amount of wobbling depends on the magnetic properties of the muon which, in turn, depend on what's going on with the muon in space.
Credit: Fabrice Coffrini / Getty Images
This is where the second idea comes in, the quantum vacuum. In physics, there is no empty space. The so-called vacuum is actually a bubbling soup of particles that appear and disappear in fractions of a second. Everything fluctuates, as encapsulated in Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. Energy fluctuates too, what we call zero-point energy. Since energy and mass are interconvertible (E=mc2, remember?), these tiny fluctuations of energy can be momentarily converted into particles that pop out and back into the busy nothingness of the quantum vacuum. Every particle of matter is cloaked with these particles emerging from vacuum fluctuations. Thus, a muon is not only a muon, but a muon dressed with these extra fleeting bits of stuff. That being the case, these extra particles affect a muon's magnetic field, and thus, its wobbling properties.
About 20 years ago, physicists at the Brookhaven National Laboratory detected anomalies in the muon's magnetic properties, larger than what theory predicted. This would mean that the quantum vacuum produces particles not accounted for by the Standard Model: new physics! Fast forward to 2017, and the experiment, at four times higher sensitivity, was repeated at the Fermi National Laboratory, where yours truly was a postdoctoral fellow a while back. The first results of the Muon g-2 experiment were unveiled on 7-April-2021 and not only confirmed the existence of a magnetic moment anomaly but greatly amplified it.
To most people, the official results, published recently, don't seem so exciting: a "tension between theory and experiment of 4.2 standard deviations." The gold standard for a new discovery in particle physics is a 5-sigma variation, or one part in 3.5 million. (That is, running the experiment 3.5 million times and only observing the anomaly once.) However, that's enough for plenty of excitement in the particle physics community, given the remarkable precision of the experimental measurements.
A time for excitement?
Now, results must be reanalyzed very carefully to make sure that (1) there are no hidden experimental errors; and (2) the theoretical calculations are not off. There will be a frenzy of calculations and papers in the coming months, all trying to make sense of the results, both on the experimental and theoretical fronts. And this is exactly how it should be. Science is a community-based effort, and the work of many compete with and complete each other.
Whatever happens, new science will be learned, even if less exciting than new particles. Or maybe, new particles have been there all along, blipping in and out of existence from the quantum vacuum, waiting to be pulled out of this busy nothingness by our tenacious efforts to find out what the world is made of.
- Benjamin Franklin wrote essays on a whole range of subjects, but one of his finest was on how to be a nice, likable person.
- Franklin lists a whole series of common errors people make while in the company of others, like over-talking or storytelling.
- His simple recipe for being good company is to be genuinely interested in others and to accept them for who they are.
Think of the nicest person you know. The person who would fit into any group configuration, who no one can dislike, or who makes a room warmer and happier just by being there.
What makes them this way? Why are they so amiable, likeable, or good-natured? What is it, you think, that makes a person good company?
There are really only two things that make someone likable.
This is the kind of advice that comes from one of history's most famously good-natured thinkers: Benjamin Franklin. His essay "On Conversation" is full of practical, surprisingly modern tips about how to be a nice person.
Franklin begins by arguing that there are really only two things that make someone likable. First, they have to be genuinely interested in what others say. Second, they have to be willing "to overlook or excuse Foibles." In other words, being good company means listening to people and ignoring their faults. Being witty, well-read, intelligent, or incredibly handsome can all make a good impression, but they're nothing without these two simple rules.
The sort of person nobody likes
From here, Franklin goes on to give a list of the common errors people tend to make while in company. These are the things people do that makes us dislike them. We might even find, with a sinking feeling in our stomach, that we do some of these ourselves.
1) Talking too much and becoming a "chaos of noise and nonsense." These people invariably talk about themselves, but even if "they speak beautifully," it's still ultimately more a soliloquy than a real conversation. Franklin mentions how funny it can be to see these kinds of people come together. They "neither hear nor care what the other says; but both talk on at any rate, and never fail to part highly disgusted with each other."
2) Asking too many questions. Interrogators are those people who have an "impertinent Inquisitiveness… of ten thousand questions," and it can feel like you're caught between a psychoanalyst and a lawyer. In itself, this might not be a bad thing, but Franklin notes it's usually just from a sense of nosiness and gossip. The questions are only designed to "discover secrets…and expose the mistakes of others."
3) Storytelling. You know those people who always have a scripted story they tell at every single gathering? Utterly painful. They'll either be entirely oblivious to how little others care for their story, or they'll be aware and carry on regardless. Franklin notes, "Old Folks are most subject to this Error," which we might think is perhaps harsh, or comically honest, depending on our age.
4) Debating. Some people are always itching for a fight or debate. The "Wrangling and Disputing" types inevitably make everyone else feel like they need to watch what they say. If you give even the lightest or most modest opinion on something, "you throw them into Rage and Passion." For them, the conversation is a boxing fight, and words are punches to be thrown.
5) Misjudging. Ribbing or mocking someone should be a careful business. We must never mock "Misfortunes, Defects, or Deformities of any kind", and should always be 100% sure we won't upset anyone. If there's any doubt about how a "joke" will be taken, don't say it. Offense is easily taken and hard to forget.
On practical philosophy
Franklin's essay is a trove of great advice, and this article only touches on the major themes. It really is worth your time to read it in its entirety. As you do, it's hard not to smile along or to think, "Yes! I've been in that situation." Though the world has changed dramatically in the 300 years since Franklin's essay, much is exactly the same. Basic etiquette doesn't change.
If there's only one thing to take away from Franklin's essay, it comes at the end, where he revises his simple recipe for being nice:
"Be ever ready to hear what others say… and do not censure others, nor expose their Failings, but kindly excuse or hide them"
So, all it takes to be good company is to listen and accept someone for who they are.
Philosophy doesn't always have to be about huge questions of truth, beauty, morality, art, or meaning. Sometimes it can teach us simply how to not be a jerk.
A recent study analyzed the skulls of early Homo species to learn more about the evolution of primate brains.