Week 5: Maslow Reading & Class Discusion

This week’s reading (and subsequent class discussion) centered on Psychologist Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs in conjunction with research pertaining to the responses by participants in the 2007 Place and Happiness Survey. In the survey, the top community attributes (which are outlined in the text) appear to be: physical and economic security, basic needs (school and healthcare), leadership, openness, and aesthetics –the top two being aesthetics and basic needs –which is somewhat contradictory to Maslow’s research. According to the author, Richard Florida, in our society there exists a “a beauty premium”, which says that people are more attracted and pay more attention to that which is more aesthetically pleasing. The author elaborates on this concept by saying that this “beauty premium” extends beyond objects, and can even extend to people’s general preference for attractive people over unattractive people. In fact, the article sites specific evidence in which people not only prefer the more attractive person, but that there is even a greater bias against unattractive people. I would have to agree to an extent that this hypothesis of the beauty premium is indeed evident in real-life situations, everyday. With regard to interviewing and hiring there is no doubt (at least for some people) a bias for the more attractive option, all things equal. In my own personal experiences I see the preference for the more beautiful and the more attractive often. For example just the other day I sat on an Honor Council trial for a very attractive girl and, although her defense was very weak in my opinion, she was deemed innocent. In this specific case although the adjudicated student’s attractiveness did not single-handedly deliver her innocence, it certainly didn’t hurt it. This point applies to my own life because in the future I will pay more attention to my subconscious preference for the more attractive, and I will work to not allow me to pick the more attractive option solely on looks alone –I will judge many other factors in addition to looks or aesthetics.

This weeks readings also touched on the idea and need for openness within a community. According to the reading openness, defined by a communal sense of tolerance and acceptance of diversity, is the third-ranked factor in the Place and Happiness Survey. The author stated that with every amount of tolerance extended to these groups, the overall happiness of a community increases. This is a very important point because, in my opinion, it is very important to be tolerant of those that are different or diverse from oneself. America and Americans pride themselves on diversity, and we often refer to America as “the melting pot”. As a college student I am exposed to a great deal of diversity, and I believe it enriches by education and maturation here at Vanderbilt University. I came from a very homogeneous community and background. The community (suburb) I grew up in outside of Chicago is predominantly white, Christian, educated, and middle to upper-middle class, or the knowledge worker class (a discussion from past weeks in this class). Furthermore, although I greatly enjoyed my childhood, I relish a much more diverse community such as that of large city. Lastly, I would have to agree with Florida’s comment that there is considerable room for growth within our communities for openness and diversity, but clearly American cities are so well populated because of this need or want for diverse communities.

This week our class had the pleasure of sitting in on Professor Jordan’s lecture. Professor Jordan brought up many important and reflective points pertaining to the readings, but he also sparked a great deal of insightful class discussion. Professor Jordan brought up the point that while we live in an increasingly globalized and technological word, we also live in an ever increasingly isolated world. Professor Jordan cited examples of people who spend a great deal of time on their computers or people who live alone. The class discussed this point for some time and came to the conclusion that this finding is somewhat inaccurate. In my opinion, and the majority of my classmates agree, technology links many of us together –it does not isolate us. While it is true that maybe it does not link us together in person (but in many cases it does, i.e. dating websites) it certainly is a medium for communication (for example email, blogs, facebook, linkden, etc). Sure many people, including myself, spend countless hours at home in front of their laptop, I would not say that the computer isolates me –that is to say that we would be using this time socializing if the technology were not available –I would disagree with that statement. Furthermore, I believe technology is not a catalyst of isolation but rather a catalyst of communication and collaboration.

Another topic deliberated heavily in class on Monday that was mentioned in the text is people’s basic needs within a community. It is not surprising that the higher people ranked a community’s basic needs, the higher their satisfaction is with that community. Obviously, one basic need for any community is access to public and secondary schools. Professor Jordan brought up that in the text the author mentions that the people who place the highest value on proximity to schools are, interestingly enough, those with less formal education. The class discussed why this might be, and many people believed it was because people of lesser education (and probably of lesser means as a result) do not have as much mobility as those who have attained a high degree in schooling. I would agree with this theory, and I would further stress that many people of greater needs are able to afford (or their parents are able to afford) private school or to travel further to a different (perhaps public, but not necessarily) school. For example, many wealthy people are able to send their children to schools in which it is necessary to fly or drive long distances to attend the institution. At Vanderbilt many students are from all over the country, and in some cases, the world. Lastly, the class also deliberated the idea that families of lesser means relish having schools in close proximity because of aspirations or dreams to one day enroll in that institution –sort of a physical representation of the American dream to finish high school and go on to college or some other secondary school. In conclusion, I found the class discussion on community needs to be very insightful, and I was able to relate many of the ideas to my own life and experiences.