History Podcasts

Review: Volume 50

Review: Volume 50

We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Thomas Sowell in One Volume

Thomas Sowell in a Hoover Institution interview in 2018. (Hoover Institution/via YouTube)

Reviews are starting to come in for the intellectual life of Thomas Sowell, Maverick: A Biography of Thomas Sowell by Jason L. Riley, the longtime Wall Street Journal writer and Manhattan Institute senior fellow. In the Washington Free Beacon, Tim Rice marvels at how Sowell, as a young Marxist delivering telegrams to rich people in Manhattan, became a disciple of market-based thinking after working for the Department of Labor. “It’s ultimately experience, not theory, that informed all of Sowell’s major intellectual turns and contributions,” Rice writes. Moreover, Sowell’s experience with campus radicalism in the 1970s made him want to leave academia for the relative distance of the think tank, the Hoover Institution at Stanford.

Being a father made Sowell want to conduct innovative research into late-talking children, and his dislike of how affirmative action works interested him in turning from economics to social theory. Riley clears the brush of notoriety in order to stoke interest in one of the 20th century’s great thinkers,” Rice says, noting that though Sowell’s work is “indispensable,” there is so much of it that it may intimidate curious readers. Maverick “is an excellent place to start” for an overview on Sowell’s thinking.

A longer review in The New Criterion by John Steele Gordon goes into more detail, quoting Milton Friedman in describing Sowell as a genius and observing that while Sowell worked for the government he noticed that “government agencies have their own self-interest to look after, regardless of those for whom a program has been set up.” Friedrich von Hayek’s essay “The Use of Knowledge in Society” gave Sowell the inspiration to write one of his most important books, Knowledge and Decisions (1980), about the decentralization of decision-making in a market economy. Sowell is devastating on the destruction wrought by affirmative action, as Gordon notes, recalling that Clarence Thomas was surprised to learn how little weight his degree from Yale Law School carried with potential employers. It turned out that employers understand how affirmative action works and discount prospective black employees as a group who appear to be its beneficiaries. This is Sowell way back in 1970:

The double standard of grades and degrees is an open secret on many college campuses, and it is only a matter of time before it is an open secret among employers as well..The market can be ruthless in devaluing degrees that do not mean what they say. It should be apparent to anyone not blinded by his own nobility that it also devalues the student in his own eyes.

Gordon says the book is short, readable, and amounts to “an enlightening tour of the thought and experiences of one of the most luminous minds this country has produced.”

Review: Volume 50 - History

Originally Published in Psychological Review, 50, 370-396.

In a previous paper (13) various propositions were presented which would have to be included in any theory of human motivation that could lay claim to being definitive. These conclusions may be briefly summarized as follows:

1. The integrated wholeness of the organism must be one of the foundation stones of motivation theory.

2. The hunger drive (or any other physiological drive) was rejected as a centering point or model for a definitive theory of motivation. Any drive that is somatically based and localizable was shown to be atypical rather than typical in human motivation.

3. Such a theory should stress and center itself upon ultimate or basic goals rather than partial or superficial ones, upon ends rather than means to these ends. Such a stress would imply a more central place for unconscious than for conscious motivations.

4. There are usually available various cultural paths to the same goal. Therefore conscious, specific, local-cultural desires are not as fundamental in motivation theory as the more basic, unconscious goals.

5. Any motivated behavior, either preparatory or consummatory, must be understood to be a channel through which many basic needs may be simultaneously expressed or satisfied. Typically an act has more than one motivation.

6. Practically all organismic states are to be understood as motivated and as motivating.

7. Human needs arrange themselves in hierarchies of pre-potency. That is to say, the appearance of one need usually rests on the prior satisfaction of another, more pre-potent need. Man is a perpetually wanting animal. Also no need or drive can be treated as if it were isolated or discrete every drive is related to the state of satisfaction or dissatisfaction of other drives.

8. Lists of drives will get us nowhere for various theoretical and practical reasons. Furthermore any classification of motivations [p. 371] must deal with the problem of levels of specificity or generalization the motives to be classified.

9. Classifications of motivations must be based upon goals rather than upon instigating drives or motivated behavior.

10. Motivation theory should be human-centered rather than animal-centered.

11. The situation or the field in which the organism reacts must be taken into account but the field alone can rarely serve as an exclusive explanation for behavior. Furthermore the field itself must be interpreted in terms of the organism. Field theory cannot be a substitute for motivation theory.

12. Not only the integration of the organism must be taken into account, but also the possibility of isolated, specific, partial or segmental reactions. It has since become necessary to add to these another affirmation.

13. Motivation theory is not synonymous with behavior theory. The motivations are only one class of determinants of behavior. While behavior is almost always motivated, it is also almost always biologically, culturally and situationally determined as well.

It is far easier to perceive and to criticize the aspects in motivation theory than to remedy them. Mostly this is because of the very serious lack of sound data in this area. I conceive this lack of sound facts to be due primarily to the absence of a valid theory of motivation. The present theory then must be considered to be a suggested program or framework for future research and must stand or fall, not so much on facts available or evidence presented, as upon researches to be done, researches suggested perhaps, by the questions raised in this paper.[p. 372]

The 'physiological' needs. -- The needs that are usually taken as the starting point for motivation theory are the so-called physiological drives. Two recent lines of research make it necessary to revise our customary notions about these needs, first, the development of the concept of homeostasis, and second, the finding that appetites (preferential choices among foods) are a fairly efficient indication of actual needs or lacks in the body.

Homeostasis refers to the body's automatic efforts to maintain a constant, normal state of the blood stream. Cannon (2) has described this process for (1) the water content of the blood, (2) salt content, (3) sugar content, (4) protein content, (5) fat content, (6) calcium content, (7) oxygen content, (8) constant hydrogen-ion level (acid-base balance) and (9) constant temperature of the blood. Obviously this list can be extended to include other minerals, the hormones, vitamins, etc.

Young in a recent article (21) has summarized the work on appetite in its relation to body needs. If the body lacks some chemical, the individual will tend to develop a specific appetite or partial hunger for that food element.

Thus it seems impossible as well as useless to make any list of fundamental physiological needs for they can come to almost any number one might wish, depending on the degree of specificity of description. We can not identify all physiological needs as homeostatic. That sexual desire, sleepiness, sheer activity and maternal behavior in animals, are homeostatic, has not yet been demonstrated. Furthermore, this list would not include the various sensory pleasures (tastes, smells, tickling, stroking) which are probably physiological and which may become the goals of motivated behavior.

In a previous paper (13) it has been pointed out that these physiological drives or needs are to be considered unusual rather than typical because they are isolable, and because they are localizable somatically. That is to say, they are relatively independent of each other, of other motivations [p. 373] and of the organism as a whole, and secondly, in many cases, it is possible to demonstrate a localized, underlying somatic base for the drive. This is true less generally than has been thought (exceptions are fatigue, sleepiness, maternal responses) but it is still true in the classic instances of hunger, sex, and thirst.

It should be pointed out again that any of the physiological needs and the consummatory behavior involved with them serve as channels for all sorts of other needs as well. That is to say, the person who thinks he is hungry may actually be seeking more for comfort, or dependence, than for vitamins or proteins. Conversely, it is possible to satisfy the hunger need in part by other activities such as drinking water or smoking cigarettes. In other words, relatively isolable as these physiological needs are, they are not completely so.

Undoubtedly these physiological needs are the most pre-potent of all needs. What this means specifically is, that in the human being who is missing everything in life in an extreme fashion, it is most likely that the major motivation would be the physiological needs rather than any others. A person who is lacking food, safety, love, and esteem would most probably hunger for food more strongly than for anything else.

If all the needs are unsatisfied, and the organism is then dominated by the physiological needs, all other needs may become simply non-existent or be pushed into the background. It is then fair to characterize the whole organism by saying simply that it is hungry, for consciousness is almost completely preempted by hunger. All capacities are put into the service of hunger-satisfaction, and the organization of these capacities is almost entirely determined by the one purpose of satisfying hunger. The receptors and effectors, the intelligence, memory, habits, all may now be defined simply as hunger-gratifying tools. Capacities that are not useful for this purpose lie dormant, or are pushed into the background. The urge to write poetry, the desire to acquire an automobile, the interest in American history, the desire for a new pair of shoes are, in the extreme case, forgotten or become of sec-[p.374]ondary importance. For the man who is extremely and dangerously hungry, no other interests exist but food. He dreams food, he remembers food, he thinks about food, he emotes only about food, he perceives only food and he wants only food. The more subtle determinants that ordinarily fuse with the physiological drives in organizing even feeding, drinking or sexual behavior, may now be so completely overwhelmed as to allow us to speak at this time (but only at this time) of pure hunger drive and behavior, with the one unqualified aim of relief.

Another peculiar characteristic of the human organism when it is dominated by a certain need is that the whole philosophy of the future tends also to change. For our chronically and extremely hungry man, Utopia can be defined very simply as a place where there is plenty of food. He tends to think that, if only he is guaranteed food for the rest of his life, he will be perfectly happy and will never want anything more. Life itself tends to be defined in terms of eating. Anything else will be defined as unimportant. Freedom, love, community feeling, respect, philosophy, may all be waved aside as fripperies which are useless since they fail to fill the stomach. Such a man may fairly be said to live by bread alone.

It cannot possibly be denied that such things are true but their generality can be denied. Emergency conditions are, almost by definition, rare in the normally functioning peaceful society. That this truism can be forgotten is due mainly to two reasons. First, rats have few motivations other than physiological ones, and since so much of the research upon motivation has been made with these animals, it is easy to carry the rat-picture over to the human being. Secondly, it is too often not realized that culture itself is an adaptive tool, one of whose main functions is to make the physiological emergencies come less and less often. In most of the known societies, chronic extreme hunger of the emergency type is rare, rather than common. In any case, this is still true in the United States. The average American citizen is experiencing appetite rather than hunger when he says "I am [p. 375] hungry." He is apt to experience sheer life-and-death hunger only by accident and then only a few times through his entire life.

Obviously a good way to obscure the 'higher' motivations, and to get a lopsided view of human capacities and human nature, is to make the organism extremely and chronically hungry or thirsty. Anyone who attempts to make an emergency picture into a typical one, and who will measure all of man's goals and desires by his behavior during extreme physiological deprivation is certainly being blind to many things. It is quite true that man lives by bread alone -- when there is no bread. But what happens to man's desires when there is plenty of bread and when his belly is chronically filled?

At once other (and 'higher') needs emerge and these, rather than physiological hungers, dominate the organism. And when these in turn are satisfied, again new (and still 'higher') needs emerge and so on. This is what we mean by saying that the basic human needs are organized into a hierarchy of relative prepotency.

One main implication of this phrasing is that gratification becomes as important a concept as deprivation in motivation theory, for it releases the organism from the domination of a relatively more physiological need, permitting thereby the emergence of other more social goals. The physiological needs, along with their partial goals, when chronically gratified cease to exist as active determinants or organizers of behavior. They now exist only in a potential fashion in the sense that they may emerge again to dominate the organism if they are thwarted. But a want that is satisfied is no longer a want. The organism is dominated and its behavior organized only by unsatisfied needs. If hunger is satisfied, it becomes unimportant in the current dynamics of the individual.

This statement is somewhat qualified by a hypothesis to be discussed more fully later, namely that it is precisely those individuals in whom a certain need has always been satisfied who are best equipped to tolerate deprivation of that need in the future, and that furthermore, those who have been de-[p. 376]prived in the past will react differently to current satisfactions than the one who has never been deprived.

The safety needs. -- If the physiological needs are relatively well gratified, there then emerges a new set of needs, which we may categorize roughly as the safety needs. All that has been said of the physiological needs is equally true, although in lesser degree, of these desires. The organism may equally well be wholly dominated by them. They may serve as the almost exclusive organizers of behavior, recruiting all the capacities of the organism in their service, and we may then fairly describe the whole organism as a safety-seeking mechanism. Again we may say of the receptors, the effectors, of the intellect and the other capacities that they are primarily safety-seeking tools. Again, as in the hungry man, we find that the dominating goal is a strong determinant not only of his current world-outlook and philosophy but also of his philosophy of the future. Practically everything looks less important than safety, (even sometimes the physiological needs which being satisfied, are now underestimated). A man, in this state, if it is extreme enough and chronic enough, may be characterized as living almost for safety alone.

Although in this paper we are interested primarily in the needs of the adult, we can approach an understanding of his safety needs perhaps more efficiently by observation of infants and children, in whom these needs are much more simple and obvious. One reason for the clearer appearance of the threat or danger reaction in infants, is that they do not inhibit this reaction at all, whereas adults in our society have been taught to inhibit it at all costs. Thus even when adults do feel their safety to be threatened we may not be able to see this on the surface. Infants will react in a total fashion and as if they were endangered, if they are disturbed or dropped suddenly, startled by loud noises, flashing light, or other unusual sensory stimulation, by rough handling, by general loss of support in the mother's arms, or by inadequate support.[1][p. 377]

In infants we can also see a much more direct reaction to bodily illnesses of various kinds. Sometimes these illnesses seem to be immediately and per se threatening and seem to make the child feel unsafe. For instance, vomiting, colic or other sharp pains seem to make the child look at the whole world in a different way. At such a moment of pain, it may be postulated that, for the child, the appearance of the whole world suddenly changes from sunniness to darkness, so to speak, and becomes a place in which anything at all might happen, in which previously stable things have suddenly become unstable. Thus a child who because of some bad food is taken ill may, for a day or two, develop fear, nightmares, and a need for protection and reassurance never seen in him before his illness.

Another indication of the child's need for safety is his preference for some kind of undisrupted routine or rhythm. He seems to want a predictable, orderly world. For instance, injustice, unfairness, or inconsistency in the parents seems to make a child feel anxious and unsafe. This attitude may be not so much because of the injustice per se or any particular pains involved, but rather because this treatment threatens to make the world look unreliable, or unsafe, or unpredictable. Young children seem to thrive better under a system which has at least a skeletal outline of rigidity, In which there is a schedule of a kind, some sort of routine, something that can be counted upon, not only for the present but also far into the future. Perhaps one could express this more accurately by saying that the child needs an organized world rather than an unorganized or unstructured one.

The central role of the parents and the normal family setup are indisputable. Quarreling, physical assault, separation, divorce or death within the family may be particularly terrifying. Also parental outbursts of rage or threats of punishment directed to the child, calling him names, speaking to him harshly, shaking him, handling him roughly, or actual [p. 378] physical punishment sometimes elicit such total panic and terror in the child that we must assume more is involved than the physical pain alone. While it is true that in some children this terror may represent also a fear of loss of parental love, it can also occur in completely rejected children, who seem to cling to the hating parents more for sheer safety and protection than because of hope of love.

Confronting the average child with new, unfamiliar, strange, unmanageable stimuli or situations will too frequently elicit the danger or terror reaction, as for example, getting lost or even being separated from the parents for a short time, being confronted with new faces, new situations or new tasks, the sight of strange, unfamiliar or uncontrollable objects, illness or death. Particularly at such times, the child's frantic clinging to his parents is eloquent testimony to their role as protectors (quite apart from their roles as food-givers and love-givers).

From these and similar observations, we may generalize and say that the average child in our society generally prefers a safe, orderly, predictable, organized world, which he can count, on, and in which unexpected, unmanageable or other dangerous things do not happen, and in which, in any case, he has all-powerful parents who protect and shield him from harm.

That these reactions may so easily be observed in children is in a way a proof of the fact that children in our society, feel too unsafe (or, in a word, are badly brought up). Children who are reared in an unthreatening, loving family do not ordinarily react as we have described above (17). In such children the danger reactions are apt to come mostly to objects or situations that adults too would consider dangerous.[2]

The healthy, normal, fortunate adult in our culture is largely satisfied in his safety needs. The peaceful, smoothly [p. 379] running, 'good' society ordinarily makes its members feel safe enough from wild animals, extremes of temperature, criminals, assault and murder, tyranny, etc. Therefore, in a very real sense, he no longer has any safety needs as active motivators. Just as a sated man no longer feels hungry, a safe man no longer feels endangered. If we wish to see these needs directly and clearly we must turn to neurotic or near-neurotic individuals, and to the economic and social underdogs. In between these extremes, we can perceive the expressions of safety needs only in such phenomena as, for instance, the common preference for a job with tenure and protection, the desire for a savings account, and for insurance of various kinds (medical, dental, unemployment, disability, old age).

Other broader aspects of the attempt to seek safety and stability in the world are seen in the very common preference for familiar rather than unfamiliar things, or for the known rather than the unknown. The tendency to have some religion or world-philosophy that organizes the universe and the men in it into some sort of satisfactorily coherent, meaningful whole is also in part motivated by safety-seeking. Here too we may list science and philosophy in general as partially motivated by the safety needs (we shall see later that there are also other motivations to scientific, philosophical or religious endeavor).

Otherwise the need for safety is seen as an active and dominant mobilizer of the organism's resources only in emergencies, e. g., war, disease, natural catastrophes, crime waves, societal disorganization, neurosis, brain injury, chronically bad situation.

Some neurotic adults in our society are, in many ways, like the unsafe child in their desire for safety, although in the former it takes on a somewhat special appearance. Their reaction is often to unknown, psychological dangers in a world that is perceived to be hostile, overwhelming and threatening. Such a person behaves as if a great catastrophe were almost always impending, i.e., he is usually responding as if to an emergency. His safety needs often find specific [p. 380] expression in a search for a protector, or a stronger person on whom he may depend, or perhaps, a Fuehrer.

The neurotic individual may be described in a slightly different way with some usefulness as a grown-up person who retains his childish attitudes toward the world. That is to say, a neurotic adult may be said to behave 'as if' he were actually afraid of a spanking, or of his mother's disapproval, or of being abandoned by his parents, or having his food taken away from him. It is as if his childish attitudes of fear and threat reaction to a dangerous world had gone underground, and untouched by the growing up and learning processes, were now ready to be called out by any stimulus that would make a child feel endangered and threatened.[3]

The neurosis in which the search for safety takes its dearest form is in the compulsive-obsessive neurosis. Compulsive-obsessives try frantically to order and stabilize the world so that no unmanageable, unexpected or unfamiliar dangers will ever appear (14) They hedge themselves about with all sorts of ceremonials, rules and formulas so that every possible contingency may be provided for and so that no new contingencies may appear. They are much like the brain injured cases, described by Goldstein (6), who manage to maintain their equilibrium by avoiding everything unfamiliar and strange and by ordering their restricted world in such a neat, disciplined, orderly fashion that everything in the world can be counted upon. They try to arrange the world so that anything unexpected (dangers) cannot possibly occur. If, through no fault of their own, something unexpected does occur, they go into a panic reaction as if this unexpected occurrence constituted a grave danger. What we can see only as a none-too-strong preference in the healthy person, e. g., preference for the familiar, becomes a life-and-death. necessity in abnormal cases.

The love needs. -- If both the physiological and the safety needs are fairly well gratified, then there will emerge the love and affection and belongingness needs, and the whole cycle [p. 381] already described will repeat itself with this new center. Now the person will feel keenly, as never before, the absence of friends, or a sweetheart, or a wife, or children. He will hunger for affectionate relations with people in general, namely, for a place in his group, and he will strive with great intensity to achieve this goal. He will want to attain such a place more than anything else in the world and may even forget that once, when he was hungry, he sneered at love.

In our society the thwarting of these needs is the most commonly found core in cases of maladjustment and more severe psychopathology. Love and affection, as well as their possible expression in sexuality, are generally looked upon with ambivalence and are customarily hedged about with many restrictions and inhibitions. Practically all theorists of psychopathology have stressed thwarting of the love needs as basic in the picture of maladjustment. Many clinical studies have therefore been made of this need and we know more about it perhaps than any of the other needs except the physiological ones (14).

One thing that must be stressed at this point is that love is not synonymous with sex. Sex may be studied as a purely physiological need. Ordinarily sexual behavior is multi-determined, that is to say, determined not only by sexual but also by other needs, chief among which are the love and affection needs. Also not to be overlooked is the fact that the love needs involve both giving and receiving love.[4]

The esteem needs. -- All people in our society (with a few pathological exceptions) have a need or desire for a stable, firmly based, (usually) high evaluation of themselves, for self-respect, or self-esteem, and for the esteem of others. By firmly based self-esteem, we mean that which is soundly based upon real capacity, achievement and respect from others. These needs may be classified into two subsidiary sets. These are, first, the desire for strength, for achievement, for adequacy, for confidence in the face of the world, and for independence and freedom.[5] Secondly, we have what [p. 382] we may call the desire for reputation or prestige (defining it as respect or esteem from other people), recognition, attention, importance or appreciation.[6] These needs have been relatively stressed by Alfred Adler and his followers, and have been relatively neglected by Freud and the psychoanalysts. More and more today however there is appearing widespread appreciation of their central importance.

Satisfaction of the self-esteem need leads to feelings of self-confidence, worth, strength, capability and adequacy of being useful and necessary in the world. But thwarting of these needs produces feelings of inferiority, of weakness and of helplessness. These feelings in turn give rise to either basic discouragement or else compensatory or neurotic trends. An appreciation of the necessity of basic self-confidence and an understanding of how helpless people are without it, can be easily gained from a study of severe traumatic neurosis (8).[7]

The need for self-actualization. -- Even if all these needs are satisfied, we may still often (if not always) expect that a new discontent and restlessness will soon develop, unless the individual is doing what he is fitted for. A musician must make music, an artist must paint, a poet must write, if he is to be ultimately happy. What a man can be, he must be. This need we may call self-actualization.

This term, first coined by Kurt Goldstein, is being used in this paper in a much more specific and limited fashion. It refers to the desire for self-fulfillment, namely, to the tendency for him to become actualized in what he is potentially. This tendency might be phrased as the desire to become more and more what one is, to become everything that one is capable of becoming.[p. 383]

The specific form that these needs will take will of course vary greatly from person to person. In one individual it may take the form of the desire to be an ideal mother, in another it may be expressed athletically, and in still another it may be expressed in painting pictures or in inventions. It is not necessarily a creative urge although in people who have any capacities for creation it will take this form.

The clear emergence of these needs rests upon prior satisfaction of the physiological, safety, love and esteem needs. We shall call people who are satisfied in these needs, basically satisfied people, and it is from these that we may expect the fullest (and healthiest) creativeness.[8] Since, in our society, basically satisfied people are the exception, we do not know much about self-actualization, either experimentally or clinically. It remains a challenging problem for research.

The preconditions for the basic need satisfactions. -- There are certain conditions which are immediate prerequisites for the basic need satisfactions. Danger to these is reacted to almost as if it were a direct danger to the basic needs themselves. Such conditions as freedom to speak, freedom to do what one wishes so long as no harm is done to others, freedom to express one's self, freedom to investigate and seek for information, freedom to defend one's self, justice, fairness, honesty, orderliness in the group are examples of such preconditions for basic need satisfactions. Thwarting in these freedoms will be reacted to with a threat or emergency response. These conditions are not ends in themselves but they are almost so since they are so closely related to the basic needs, which are apparently the only ends in themselves. These conditions are defended because without them the basic satisfactions are quite impossible, or at least, very severely endangered.[p. 384]

If we remember that the cognitive capacities (perceptual, intellectual, learning) are a set of adjustive tools, which have, among other functions, that of satisfaction of our basic needs, then it is clear that any danger to them, any deprivation or blocking of their free use, must also be indirectly threatening to the basic needs themselves. Such a statement is a partial solution of the general problems of curiosity, the search for knowledge, truth and wisdom, and the ever-persistent urge to solve the cosmic mysteries.

We must therefore introduce another hypothesis and speak of degrees of closeness to the basic needs, for we have already pointed out that any conscious desires (partial goals) are more or less important as they are more or less close to the basic needs. The same statement may be made for various behavior acts. An act is psychologically important if it contributes directly to satisfaction of basic needs. The less directly it so contributes, or the weaker this contribution is, the less important this act must be conceived to be from the point of view of dynamic psychology. A similar statement may be made for the various defense or coping mechanisms. Some are very directly related to the protection or attainment of the basic needs, others are only weakly and distantly related. Indeed if we wished, we could speak of more basic and less basic defense mechanisms, and then affirm that danger to the more basic defenses is more threatening than danger to less basic defenses (always remembering that this is so only because of their relationship to the basic needs).

The desires to know and to understand. -- So far, we have mentioned the cognitive needs only in passing. Acquiring knowledge and systematizing the universe have been considered as, in part, techniques for the achievement of basic safety in the world, or, for the intelligent man, expressions of self-actualization. Also freedom of inquiry and expression have been discussed as preconditions of satisfactions of the basic needs. True though these formulations may be, they do not constitute definitive answers to the question as to the motivation role of curiosity, learning, philosophizing, experimenting, etc. They are, at best, no more than partial answers.[p. 385]

This question is especially difficult because we know so little about the facts. Curiosity, exploration, desire for the facts, desire to know may certainly be observed easily enough. The fact that they often are pursued even at great cost to the individual's safety is an earnest of the partial character of our previous discussion. In addition, the writer must admit that, though he has sufficient clinical evidence to postulate the desire to know as a very strong drive in intelligent people, no data are available for unintelligent people. It may then be largely a function of relatively high intelligence. Rather tentatively, then, and largely in the hope of stimulating discussion and research, we shall postulate a basic desire to know, to be aware of reality, to get the facts, to satisfy curiosity, or as Wertheimer phrases it, to see rather than to be blind.

This postulation, however, is not enough. Even after we know, we are impelled to know more and more minutely and microscopically on the one hand, and on the other, more and more extensively in the direction of a world philosophy, religion, etc. The facts that we acquire, if they are isolated or atomistic, inevitably get theorized about, and either analyzed or organized or both. This process has been phrased by some as the search for 'meaning.' We shall then postulate a desire to understand, to systematize, to organize, to analyze, to look for relations and meanings.

Once these desires are accepted for discussion, we see that they too form themselves into a small hierarchy in which the desire to know is prepotent over the desire to understand. All the characteristics of a hierarchy of prepotency that we have described above, seem to hold for this one as well.

We must guard ourselves against the too easy tendency to separate these desires from the basic needs we have discussed above, i.e., to make a sharp dichotomy between 'cognitive' and 'conative' needs. The desire to know and to understand are themselves conative, i.e., have a striving character, and are as much personality needs as the 'basic needs' we have already discussed (19).[p. 386]


The degree of fixity of the hierarchy of basic needs. -- We have spoken so far as if this hierarchy were a fixed order but actually it is not nearly as rigid as we may have implied. It is true that most of the people with whom we have worked have seemed to have these basic needs in about the order that has been indicated. However, there have been a number of exceptions.

(1) There are some people in whom, for instance, self-esteem seems to be more important than love. This most common reversal in the hierarchy is usually due to the development of the notion that the person who is most likely to be loved is a strong or powerful person, one who inspires respect or fear, and who is self confident or aggressive. Therefore such people who lack love and seek it, may try hard to put on a front of aggressive, confident behavior. But essentially they seek high self-esteem and its behavior expressions more as a means-to-an-end than for its own sake they seek self-assertion for the sake of love rather than for self-esteem itself.

(2) There are other, apparently innately creative people in whom the drive to creativeness seems to be more important than any other counter-determinant. Their creativeness might appear not as self-actualization released by basic satisfaction, but in spite of lack of basic satisfaction.

(3) In certain people the level of aspiration may be permanently deadened or lowered. That is to say, the less pre-potent goals may simply be lost, and may disappear forever, so that the person who has experienced life at a very low level, i. e., chronic unemployment, may continue to be satisfied for the rest of his life if only he can get enough food.

(4) The so-called 'psychopathic personality' is another example of permanent loss of the love needs. These are people who, according to the best data available (9), have been starved for love in the earliest months of their lives and have simply lost forever the desire and the ability to give and to receive affection (as animals lose sucking or pecking reflexes that are not exercised soon enough after birth).[p. 387]

(5) Another cause of reversal of the hierarchy is that when a need has been satisfied for a long time, this need may be underevaluated. People who have never experienced chronic hunger are apt to underestimate its effects and to look upon food as a rather unimportant thing. If they are dominated by a higher need, this higher need will seem to be the most important of all. It then becomes possible, and indeed does actually happen, that they may, for the sake of this higher need, put themselves into the position of being deprived in a more basic need. We may expect that after a long-time deprivation of the more basic need there will be a tendency to reevaluate both needs so that the more pre-potent need will actually become consciously prepotent for the individual who may have given it up very lightly. Thus, a man who has given up his job rather than lose his self-respect, and who then starves for six months or so, may be willing to take his job back even at the price of losing his a self-respect.

(6) Another partial explanation of apparent reversals is seen in the fact that we have been talking about the hierarchy of prepotency in terms of consciously felt wants or desires rather than of behavior. Looking at behavior itself may give us the wrong impression. What we have claimed is that the person will want the more basic of two needs when deprived in both. There is no necessary implication here that he will act upon his desires. Let us say again that there are many determinants of behavior other than the needs and desires.

(7) Perhaps more important than all these exceptions are the ones that involve ideals, high social standards, high values and the like. With such values people become martyrs they give up everything for the sake of a particular ideal, or value. These people may be understood, at least in part, by reference to one basic concept (or hypothesis) which may be called 'increased frustration-tolerance through early gratification'. People who have been satisfied in their basic needs throughout their lives, particularly in their earlier years, seem to develop exceptional power to withstand present or future thwarting of these needs simply because they have strong,[p. 388] healthy character structure as a result of basic satisfaction. They are the 'strong' people who can easily weather disagreement or opposition, who can swim against the stream of public opinion and who can stand up for the truth at great personal cost. It is just the ones who have loved and been well loved, and who have had many deep friendships who can hold out against hatred, rejection or persecution.

I say all this in spite of the fact that there is a certain amount of sheer habituation which is also involved in any full discussion of frustration tolerance. For instance, it is likely that those persons who have been accustomed to relative starvation for a long time, are partially enabled thereby to withstand food deprivation. What sort of balance must be made between these two tendencies, of habituation on the one hand, and of past satisfaction breeding present frustration tolerance on the other hand, remains to be worked out by further research. Meanwhile we may assume that they are both operative, side by side, since they do not contradict each other, In respect to this phenomenon of increased frustration tolerance, it seems probable that the most important gratifications come in the first two years of life. That is to say, people who have been made secure and strong in the earliest years, tend to remain secure and strong thereafter in the face of whatever threatens.

Degree of relative satisfaction. -- So far, our theoretical discussion may have given the impression that these five sets of needs are somehow in a step-wise, all-or-none relationships to each other. We have spoken in such terms as the following: "If one need is satisfied, then another emerges." This statement might give the false impression that a need must be satisfied 100 per cent before the next need emerges. In actual fact, most members of our society who are normal, are partially satisfied in all their basic needs and partially unsatisfied in all their basic needs at the same time. A more realistic description of the hierarchy would be in terms of decreasing percentages of satisfaction as we go up the hierarchy of prepotency, For instance, if I may assign arbitrary figures for the sake of illustration, it is as if the average citizen [p. 389] is satisfied perhaps 85 per cent in his physiological needs, 70 per cent in his safety needs, 50 per cent in his love needs, 40 per cent in his self-esteem needs, and 10 per cent in his self-actualization needs.

As for the concept of emergence of a new need after satisfaction of the prepotent need, this emergence is not a sudden, saltatory phenomenon but rather a gradual emergence by slow degrees from nothingness. For instance, if prepotent need A is satisfied only 10 per cent: then need B may not be visible at all. However, as this need A becomes satisfied 25 per cent, need B may emerge 5 per cent, as need A becomes satisfied 75 per cent need B may emerge go per cent, and so on.

Unconscious character of needs. -- These needs are neither necessarily conscious nor unconscious. On the whole, however, in the average person, they are more often unconscious rather than conscious. It is not necessary at this point to overhaul the tremendous mass of evidence which indicates the crucial importance of unconscious motivation. It would by now be expected, on a priori grounds alone, that unconscious motivations would on the whole be rather more important than the conscious motivations. What we have called the basic needs are very often largely unconscious although they may, with suitable techniques, and with sophisticated people become conscious.

Cultural specificity and generality of needs. -- This classification of basic needs makes some attempt to take account of the relative unity behind the superficial differences in specific desires from one culture to another. Certainly in any particular culture an individual's conscious motivational content will usually be extremely different from the conscious motivational content of an individual in another society. However, it is the common experience of anthropologists that people, even in different societies, are much more alike than we would think from our first contact with them, and that as we know them better we seem to find more and more of this commonness, We then recognize the most startling differences to be superficial rather than basic, e. g., differences in style of hair-dress, clothes, tastes in food, etc. Our classification of basic [p. 390] needs is in part an attempt to account for this unity behind the apparent diversity from culture to culture. No claim is made that it is ultimate or universal for all cultures. The claim is made only that it is relatively more ultimate, more universal, more basic, than the superficial conscious desires from culture to culture, and makes a somewhat closer approach to common-human characteristics, Basic needs are more common-human than superficial desires or behaviors.

Multiple motivations of behavior. -- These needs must be understood not to be exclusive or single determiners of certain kinds of behavior. An example may be found in any behavior that seems to be physiologically motivated, such as eating, or sexual play or the like. The clinical psychologists have long since found that any behavior may be a channel through which flow various determinants. Or to say it in another way, most behavior is multi-motivated. Within the sphere of motivational determinants any behavior tends to be determined by several or all of the basic needs simultaneously rather than by only one of them. The latter would be more an exception than the former. Eating may be partially for the sake of filling the stomach, and partially for the sake of comfort and amelioration of other needs. One may make love not only for pure sexual release, but also to convince one's self of one's masculinity, or to make a conquest, to feel powerful, or to win more basic affection. As an illustration, I may point out that it would be possible (theoretically if not practically) to analyze a single act of an individual and see in it the expression of his physiological needs, his safety needs, his love needs, his esteem needs and self-actualization. This contrasts sharply with the more naive brand of trait psychology in which one trait or one motive accounts for a certain kind of act, i. e., an aggressive act is traced solely to a trait of aggressiveness.

Multiple determinants of behavior. -- Not all behavior is determined by the basic needs. We might even say that not all behavior is motivated. There are many determinants of behavior other than motives.[9] For instance, one other im-[p. 391]portant class of determinants is the so-called 'field' determinants. Theoretically, at least, behavior may be determined completely by the field, or even by specific isolated external stimuli, as in association of ideas, or certain conditioned reflexes. If in response to the stimulus word 'table' I immediately perceive a memory image of a table, this response certainly has nothing to do with my basic needs.

Secondly, we may call attention again to the concept of 'degree of closeness to the basic needs' or 'degree of motivation.' Some behavior is highly motivated, other behavior is only weakly motivated. Some is not motivated at all (but all behavior is determined).

Another important point [10] is that there is a basic difference between expressive behavior and coping behavior (functional striving, purposive goal seeking). An expressive behavior does not try to do anything it is simply a reflection of the personality. A stupid man behaves stupidly, not because he wants to, or tries to, or is motivated to, but simply because he is what he is. The same is true when I speak in a bass voice rather than tenor or soprano. The random movements of a healthy child, the smile on the face of a happy man even when he is alone, the springiness of the healthy man's walk, and the erectness of his carriage are other examples of expressive, non-functional behavior. Also the style in which a man carries out almost all his behavior, motivated as well as unmotivated, is often expressive.

We may then ask, is all behavior expressive or reflective of the character structure? The answer is 'No.' Rote, habitual, automatized, or conventional behavior may or may not be expressive. The same is true for most 'stimulus-bound' behaviors. It is finally necessary to stress that expressiveness of behavior, and goal-directedness of behavior are not mutually exclusive categories. Average behavior is usually both.

Goals as centering principle in motivation theory. -- It will be observed that the basic principle in our classification has [p. 392] been neither the instigation nor the motivated behavior but rather the functions, effects, purposes, or goals of the behavior. It has been proven sufficiently by various people that this is the most suitable point for centering in any motivation theory.[11]

Animal- and human-centering. -- This theory starts with the human being rather than any lower and presumably 'simpler' animal. Too many of the findings that have been made in animals have been proven to be true for animals but not for the human being. There is no reason whatsoever why we should start with animals in order to study human motivation. The logic or rather illogic behind this general fallacy of 'pseudo-simplicity' has been exposed often enough by philosophers and logicians as well as by scientists in each of the various fields. It is no more necessary to study animals before one can study man than it is to study mathematics before one can study geology or psychology or biology.

We may also reject the old, naive, behaviorism which assumed that it was somehow necessary, or at least more 'scientific' to judge human beings by animal standards. One consequence of this belief was that the whole notion of purpose and goal was excluded from motivational psychology simply because one could not ask a white rat about his purposes. Tolman (18) has long since proven in animal studies themselves that this exclusion was not necessary.

Motivation and the theory of psychopathogenesis. -- The conscious motivational content of everyday life has, according to the foregoing, been conceived to be relatively important or unimportant accordingly as it is more or less closely related to the basic goals. A desire for an ice cream cone might actually be an indirect expression of a desire for love. If it is, then this desire for the ice cream cone becomes extremely important motivation. If however the ice cream is simply something to cool the mouth with, or a casual appetitive reaction, then the desire is relatively unimportant. Everyday conscious desires are to be regarded as symptoms, as [p. 393] surface indicators of more basic needs. If we were to take these superficial desires at their face value me would find ourselves in a state of complete confusion which could never be resolved, since we would be dealing seriously with symptoms rather than with what lay behind the symptoms.

Thwarting of unimportant desires produces no psychopathological results thwarting of a basically important need does produce such results. Any theory of psychopathogenesis must then be based on a sound theory of motivation. A conflict or a frustration is not necessarily pathogenic. It becomes so only when it threatens or thwarts the basic needs, or partial needs that are closely related to the basic needs (10).

The role of gratified needs. -- It has been pointed out above several times that our needs usually emerge only when more prepotent needs have been gratified. Thus gratification has an important role in motivation theory. Apart from this, however, needs cease to play an active determining or organizing role as soon as they are gratified.

What this means is that, e. g., a basically satisfied person no longer has the needs for esteem, love, safety, etc. The only sense in which he might be said to have them is in the almost metaphysical sense that a sated man has hunger, or a filled bottle has emptiness. If we are interested in what actually motivates us, and not in what has, will, or might motivate us, then a satisfied need is not a motivator. It must be considered for all practical purposes simply not to exist, to have disappeared. This point should be emphasized because it has been either overlooked or contradicted in every theory of motivation I know.[12] The perfectly healthy, normal, fortunate man has no sex needs or hunger needs, or needs for safety, or for love, or for prestige, or self-esteem, except in stray moments of quickly passing threat. If we were to say otherwise, we should also have to aver that every man had all the pathological reflexes, e. g., Babinski, etc., because if his nervous system were damaged, these would appear.

It is such considerations as these that suggest the bold [p. 394] postulation that a man who is thwarted in any of his basic needs may fairly be envisaged simply as a sick man. This is a fair parallel to our designation as 'sick' of the man who lacks vitamins or minerals. Who is to say that a lack of love is less important than a lack of vitamins? Since we know the pathogenic effects of love starvation, who is to say that we are invoking value-questions in an unscientific or illegitimate way, any more than the physician does who diagnoses and treats pellagra or scurvy? If I were permitted this usage, I should then say simply that a healthy man is primarily motivated by his needs to develop and actualize his fullest potentialities and capacities. If a man has any other basic needs in any active, chronic sense, then he is simply an unhealthy man. He is as surely sick as if he had suddenly developed a strong salt-hunger or calcium hunger.[13]

If this statement seems unusual or paradoxical the reader may be assured that this is only one among many such paradoxes that will appear as we revise our ways of looking at man's deeper motivations. When we ask what man wants of life, we deal with his very essence.

(1) There are at least five sets of goals, which we may call basic needs. These are briefly physiological, safety, love, 'esteem, and self-actualization. In addition, we are motivated by the desire to achieve or maintain the various conditions upon which these basic satisfactions rest and by certain more intellectual desires.

(2) These basic goals are related to each other, being arranged in a hierarchy of prepotency. This means that the most prepotent goal will monopolize consciousness and will tend of itself to organize the recruitment of the various capacities of the organism. The less prepotent needs are [p. 395] minimized, even forgotten or denied. But when a need is fairly well satisfied, the next prepotent ('higher') need emerges, in turn to dominate the conscious life and to serve as the center of organization of behavior, since gratified needs are not active motivators.

Thus man is a perpetually wanting animal. Ordinarily the satisfaction of these wants is not altogether mutually exclusive, but only tends to be. The average member of our society is most often partially satisfied and partially unsatisfied in all of his wants. The hierarchy principle is usually empirically observed in terms of increasing percentages of non-satisfaction as we go up the hierarchy. Reversals of the average order of the hierarchy are sometimes observed. Also it has been observed that an individual may permanently lose the higher wants in the hierarchy under special conditions. There are not only ordinarily multiple motivations for usual behavior, but in addition many determinants other than motives.

(3) Any thwarting or possibility of thwarting of these basic human goals, or danger to the defenses which protect them, or to the conditions upon which they rest, is considered to be a psychological threat. With a few exceptions, all psychopathology may be partially traced to such threats. A basically thwarted man may actually be defined as a 'sick' man, if we wish.

(4) It is such basic threats which bring about the general emergency reactions.

(5) Certain other basic problems have not been dealt with because of limitations of space. Among these are (a) the problem of values in any definitive motivation theory, (b) the relation between appetites, desires, needs and what is 'good' for the organism, (c) the etiology of the basic needs and their possible derivation in early childhood, (d) redefinition of motivational concepts, i. e., drive, desire, wish, need, goal, (e) implication of our theory for hedonistic theory, (f) the nature of the uncompleted act, of success and failure, and of aspiration-level, (g) the role of association, habit and conditioning, (h) relation to the [p. 396] theory of inter-personal relations, (i) implications for psychotherapy, (j) implication for theory of society, (k) the theory of selfishness, (l) the relation between needs and cultural patterns, (m) the relation between this theory and Alport's theory of functional autonomy. These as well as certain other less important questions must be considered as motivation theory attempts to become definitive.

[ 1] As the child grows up, sheer knowledge and familiarity as well as better motor development make these 'dangers' less and less dangerous and more and more manageable. Throughout life it may be said that one of the main conative functions of education is this neutralizing of apparent dangers through knowledge, e. g., I am not afraid of thunder because I know something about it.

[ 2] A 'test battery' for safety might be confronting the child with a small exploding firecracker, or with a bewhiskered face having the mother leave the room, putting him upon a high ladder, a hypodermic injection, having a mouse crawl up to him, etc. Of course I cannot seriously recommend the deliberate use of such 'tests' for they might very well harm the child being tested. But these and similar situations come up by the score in the child's ordinary day-to-day living and may be observed. There is no reason why those stimuli should not be used with, far example, young chimpanzees.

[ 3] Not all neurotic individuals feel unsafe. Neurosis may have at its core a thwarting of the affection and esteem needs in a person who is generally safe.

[ 4] For further details see (12) and (16, Chap. 5).

[ 5] Whether or not this particular desire is universal we do not know. The crucial question, especially important today, is "Will men who are enslaved and dominated inevitably feel dissatisfied and rebellious?" We may assume on the basis of commonly known clinical data that a man who has known true freedom (not paid for by giving up safety and security but rather built on the basis of adequate safety and security) will not willingly or easily allow his freedom to be taken away from him. But we do not know that this is true for the person born into slavery. The events of the next decade should give us our answer. See discussion of this problem in (5).

[ 6] Perhaps the desire for prestige and respect from others is subsidiary to the desire for self-esteem or confidence in oneself. Observation of children seems to indicate that this is so, but clinical data give no clear support for such a conclusion.

[ 7] For more extensive discussion of normal self-esteem, as well as for reports of various researches, see (11).

[ 8] Clearly creative behavior, like painting, is like any other behavior in having multiple, determinants. It may be seen in 'innately creative' people whether they are satisfied or not, happy or unhappy, hungry or sated. Also it is clear that creative activity may be compensatory, ameliorative or purely economic. It is my impression (as yet unconfirmed) that it is possible to distinguish the artistic and intellectual products of basically satisfied people from those of basically unsatisfied people by inspection alone. In any case, here too we must distinguish, in a dynamic fashion, the overt behavior itself from its various motivations or purposes.

[ 9] I am aware that many psychologists md psychoanalysts use the term 'motivated' and 'determined' synonymously, e. g., Freud. But I consider this an obfuscating usage. Sharp distinctions are necessary for clarity of thought, and precision in experimentation.

[ 10] To be discussed fully in a subsequent publication.

[ 11] The interested reader is referred to the very excellent discussion of this point in Murray's Explorations in Personality (15).

[ 12] Note that acceptance of this theory necessitates basic revision of the Freudian theory.

[ 13] If we were to use the word 'sick' in this way, we should then also have to face squarely the relations of man to his society. One clear implication of our definition would be that (1) since a man is to be called sick who is basically thwarted, and (2) since such basic thwarting is made possible ultimately only by forces outside the individual, then (3) sickness in the individual must come ultimately from sickness in the society. The 'good' or healthy society would then be defined as one that permitted man's highest purposes to emerge by satisfying all his prepotent basic needs.

1. ADLER, A. Social interest. London: Faber & Faber, 1938.

2. CANNON, W. B. Wisdom of the body. New York: Norton, 1932.

3. FREUD, A. The ego and the mechanisms of defense. London: Hogarth, 1937.

4. FREUD, S. New introductory lectures on psychoanalysis. New York: Norton, 1933.

5. FROMM, E. Escape from freedom. New York: Farrar and Rinehart, 1941.

6. GOLDSTEIN, K. The organism. New York: American Book Co., 1939.

7. HORNEY, K. The neurotic personality of our time. New York: Norton, 1937.

8. KARDINER, A. The traumatic neuroses of war. New York: Hoeber, 1941.

9. LEVY, D. M. Primary affect hunger. Amer. J. Psychiat., 1937, 94, 643-652.

10. MASLOW, A. H. Conflict, frustration, and the theory of threat. J. abnorm. (soc.) Psychol., 1943, 38, 81-86.

11. ----------. Dominance, personality and social behavior in women. J. soc. Psychol., 1939, 10, 3-39.

12. ----------. The dynamics of psychological security-insecurity. Character & Pers., 1942, 10, 331-344.

13. ----------. A preface to motivation theory. Psychosomatic Med., 1943, 5, 85-92.

14. ----------. & MITTLEMANN, B. Principles of abnormal psychology. New York: Harper & Bros., 1941.

15. MURRAY, H. A., et al. Explorations in Personality. New York: Oxford University Press, 1938.

16. PLANT, J. Personality and the cultural pattern. New York: Commonwealth Fund, 1937.

17. SHIRLEY, M. Children's adjustments to a strange situation. J. abrnorm. (soc.) Psychol., 1942, 37, 201-217.

18. TOLMAN, E. C. Purposive behavior in animals and men. New York: Century, 1932.

19. WERTHEIMER, M. Unpublished lectures at the New School for Social Research.

20. YOUNG, P. T. Motivation of behavior. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1936.

21. ----------. The experimental analysis of appetite. Psychol. Bull., 1941, 38, 129-164.

Exploring World History and Exploring America 2014 editions

The Notgrass history courses might better be labeled unit studies rather than history since each course actually covers history, English (literature and composition), and Bible/Religion equivalent to one full credit for each subject area. Courses also incorporate fiction and non-fiction books as we find in most unit studies. These are challenging high school courses, written for homeschooling families. They will likely appeal to those who prefer to integrate subjects and wish to teach a biblical Christian (Protestant) worldview and a conservative, limited-government philosophy.

Three core textbooks are essential for each course. (The three core textbooks are sold as a curriculum package.) These core books are full-color, hardcover books. There is also an optional Student Review Pack for each course.

Two of the core books, Part 1 and Part 2, contain the textbook material presented in daily lessons while the third book contains primary source readings to accompany the lessons. In each course, Part 1 has 75 lessons for the first semester while Part 2 has 75 lessons for the second semester.

Each course (the set of three books) also includes an eight-page booklet titled Guide for Parents Using Exploring America (or Guide for Parents Using Exploring World History), which has a course description and important tips for using the course. The Part 1 volume for each course also has a "How to Use This Curriculum" section at the beginning of the book. The latter is written directly to the student, assuming that the courses are being used for independent study for the most part.

Lessons are divided into weekly units with five lessons per unit. Some lessons might require more time, so you might spend more than five days on a unit. There are only 30 units per course, so students should have plenty of time to complete each course even if they take extra time for some lessons.

All course books are illustrated with full-color photos and graphics. Indexes are included at the end of Part 2 of each course and also in both books of course reading material. The writing style is more interesting than in most histories since it is colored by commentary and opinion.

There are no questions within the textbooks, but there are activities and projects for students to complete. Units begin with a brief introduction, titles of the five lessons for the week, a Bible passage to be memorized, book or books required, and project choices for the unit. Students choose an assignment from the project suggestions that they will work on over the week. At the end of each day's lesson in the textbooks is a box with assignments that might include Bible reading, a reminder about scripture memorization, reading assignments in either a required book or the third book for the course, project reminders, and optional work in the Student Review book.

Unit projects vary from artwork and cooking through research and writing. Writing projects are generally suggested to be between 300 and 500 words, and they include a wide range of writing styles since the courses are intended to develop broad composition skills. Students should choose a minimum of six writing assignments from among the projects, but it seems to me that most students could complete a writing project each week, while occasionally completing other projects as well.

The writing projects are thought-provoking and often require further research. For example, the two choices for Unit 10 in Exploring America are:

  • "Summarize the historical arguments in support of slavery and the arguments opposing slavery. Give your opinion on the issue and on how the issue should have been settled."
  • "Write about how being an immigrant in this time period might have affected your fears, beliefs, connections with family, and dreams."

Both courses include an option for the student to complete a 2,000- to 2,500-word research paper following a four-week plan.

There is a section near the beginning of the Part 1 volume of each course titled "Advice on Writing" with both general and specific tips, but this is very limited help for actually teaching students how to write if they need structured guidance. However, it does have some specific guidelines for the research paper. The "Guide for Parents" suggests some composition programs you might use if students need more direct instruction in composition and essay writing.

The situation is similar for literary analysis. Student Review books each have nine pages of instruction on literary analysis (the same material in both courses), and they include Notgrass's literary analysis on the required books, but this isn't the same as an extensive course on literary analysis that walks students through the various aspects with specific assignments. Nevertheless, the models and general instruction might be sufficient for many students.

Students should spend an average of 2.5 to 3 hours per day for all three subject areas, although reading the assigned literature might require more time than this. The actual time per day in each subject area will vary.

Some parents might find the assignments within the textbooks sufficient for "feedback," but others will want to use the optional Student Review Pack for each course. The Student Review Packs each have three components: Student Review, Quiz and Exam Book, and Answer Key.

The Student Review books have questions for each lesson that range in style from simple recall to short essay. There are also questions on the readings from the third volume for each course. Literary analysis notes are included for the separate fiction and non-fiction works. The Student Review book for Exploring World History also has Scripture commentary. There are normally ten questions for each day, and they might require quite a bit of writing, especially if a number of them require short-essay type answers. All of these questions serve the purpose of helping parents assess whether or not students are actually reading and learning the material, so they are useful! However, you might assign some of these for compositions and use others for discussion if you think the writing load is too heavy.

The Quiz and Exam Books have weekly quizzes plus exams every five units for history, English, and Bible—a separate exam for each subject area. There are no cumulative exams that cover the entire course.

Remember that the Student Review Packs are optional, so you need not use them at all. Author Ray Notgrass says that his goal is to encourage students to enjoy history and great literature, while also becoming good writers. He believes that the projects and assignments within each lesson and each unit are sufficient to encourage this. Nevertheless, I suspect most parents will want the Student Review Pack to keep students accountable.

I mentioned previously that fiction and non-fiction books are used with each course. These are listed below under the course descriptions. The books might be borrowed from the library, purchased as a literature package from Notgrass Company, or purchased elsewhere.

Students can work through each course independently for the most part, although parents will need to evaluate written assignments and might prefer to discuss some topics or readings with students. Parents also need to check answers for students using the Student Review book.

The publisher's website has some valuable extras and information on each course under their "Editions, Updates, and Corrections" page. Be sure to check this out for whichever course you are using. Among the website resources are an Assignment Checklist, a Grading Chart, and a comprehensive list of all project ideas for the course that you will probably want to use.

Note that these 2014 editions are updates of earlier editions, but they are vastly improved in appearance and usability, and content has been updated and expanded.

Here are some particulars on each course.

Exploring America

As I mentioned before, there are two volumes with the daily lessons. Part 1 covers Columbus through Reconstruction, while Part 2 continues with the late 1800s through the present. American Voices is the title of the third core book. This is a compilation of documents, speeches, essays, hymns, poems, and short stories that are to be read in conjunction with the lessons.

The 12 additional books required for this course are The Scarlet Letter, Narrative of the Life of David Crockett, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, Uncle Tom's Cabin, Co. Aytch, Humorous Stories and Sketches, In His Steps, Up From Slavery, Mama's Bank Account, Miracle in the Hills, To Kill a Mockingbird, and The Giver. Some alternatives for literary works are suggested on the last page of the "Guide for Parents."

In the main textbooks, each day's lesson includes presentation of the historical information as you find in other history books. However, it also presents more information on religious events and issues than do most texts. In addition, it clearly has a limited-government, conservative viewpoint. What might be controversial political opinions (e.g., problems resulting from the New Deal's expansion of "social planning" and government intervention) are explained at length, with recognition often granted to the positive effects. Topics such as the Scopes Trial receive more attention than usual with a broader explanation of their importance. Bible lessons (the fifth lesson in each unit) often touch on historical and cultural topics beyond U.S. History.

Exploring World History

Part 1 of Exploring World History covers Creation through the Middle Ages. Part 2 covers the Renaissance to the present. Even though Exploring World History is a two-volume study, coverage is necessarily limited. The choice to present the course from a biblical Christian worldview, dictates heavier emphasis upon biblical history. The text also discusses topics such as a Christian perspective on history, the role of religious motivations in history, Creation (no cavemen and no evolution), the Fall, arguments for the existence of God, stories of Abraham, Joseph, Moses, David, Cyrus, and other key figures from biblical history, as well as a brief study of Israel, Babylon, Assyria, Persia, and some of the other ancient civilizations in relation to the Bible. Egypt and Sumer receive a bit more attention than the other ancient civilizations that interacted with the Israelites.

With that much attention given to biblical foundations and early civilizations, it limits the amount of time available for other topics. Thus, topics such as the Greek civilization, the Roman Empire, the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Age of Exploration are allotted only one week each. Because understanding worldviews is an important goal of this course, Unit 23, titled "A Revolution in Thought," covers Karl Marx, Charles Darwin, Sigmund Freud, John Dewey, and Higher Criticism (in biblical studies). These men and their ideas caused significant changes in both thought and belief that remain with us today. While students might not cover as much factual historical information, they will learn to think more deeply about what they learn.

The third book for the course, titled In Their Words, includes original documents, poems, short stories, excerpts from novels, hymns, and speeches that relate to historical topics in the lessons.

The 12 books required for this course are The Cat of Bubastes The Art of War Julius Caesar The Imitation of Christ Here I Stand A Tale of Two Cities North and South The Hiding Place Animal Farm Bridge to the Sun Cry, the Beloved Country and The Abolition of Man. Alternatives for some of these works are suggested on the last page of the "Guide for Parents."


The Notgrass Company sells three packages for each course: a set of the three core volumes, the Student Review Pack, and the literature package. Only the first package is a required purchase, but I highly recommend using all course components.

I mentioned earlier that these are challenging courses. While the textbook reading is not overly challenging, the amount of reading in the other books coupled with the numerous writing assignments requires a significant amount of personal diligence and effort. Self-motivated students who enjoy reading and writing will do best in these courses and are likely to very much appreciate the format.

Students who struggle with the reading or writing might use the courses in an abbreviated manner rather than trying to accomplish three full subject credits. The easiest way to lighten the load is to cut back on the required reading and writing assignments, using more traditional resources to work toward part of the English credit. However, keep in mind that the integrated learning that happens by using the recommended resources is likely to provide a much better and more interesting education.

Pricing Information

When prices appear, please keep in mind that they are subject to change. Click on links where available to verify price accuracy.

List prices: core volumes set - $110 each, student review packs - $17 each
Literature packages: Exploring World History - $95, Exploring America - $90
You can purchase from Notgrass Company using my affiliate link by clicking here. (Using affiliate links helps support this website.)
You might want to check out the premade lesson plans from Homeschool Planet that are available for Exploring World History and Exploring America.

Find lesson plans available for this product at Homeschool Planet. Sign up for a 30-day FREE trial.

Spartacus: Film and History

I thought I was becoming a little bored with Spartacus until I read this book. Following in the wake of his collections of articles on the movies Gladiator and Troy (both Blackwell, 2004 and 2006 respectively), Winkler has produced a volume on the film Spartacus (1960), directed by Stanley Kubrick and starring Kirk Douglas. Because the film is now nearly 50 years old, the result is rather different from the two previous books but will be no less useful for students of this genre of film. There are discussions on the making of the film, the aims of those involved, the historical (in)accuracy, the portrayals of Spartacus and Crassus, the ideology found in the film, and its reflection, distorted or otherwise, of the events of the first century BC and the Cold War during which it was produced. Two essays from the original souvenir programme are reproduced with editorial comments. Extracts from main ancient sources which mention Spartacus are included at the end.

Some might argue that the history of the making of the film is more entertaining than the finished product. Of particular value are the two articles by Duncan Cooper (‘Who Killed the Legend of Spartacus? Production, Censorship, and Reconstruction of Stanley Kubrick’s Epic Film’ and ‘Dalton Trumbo vs. Stanley Kubrick: The Historical Meaning of Spartacus’), which contain fascinating results of his research into the battles behind the scenes to produce the film as it exists today on DVD. Cooper’s contributions reveal much about the political situation in Hollywood in the late 1950s, a period of history almost as polarised and divisive as the first century BC. His knowledge of the film is unsurpassed and what he has to say will affect your viewing of the film forever.

The two other items which stand out, but for different reasons, are the essays reproduced (with helpful editorial comment) from the original souvenir programme book for the film. The first of these (‘Spartacus, Rebel against Rome’) is an amalgamation of two versions of an essay written by C. A. Robinson Jr, who in 1960 was Professor of Classics in Brown University. This should be read alongside Winkler’s article at the end of the volume, ‘”Culturally Significant and Not Just Simple Entertainment”: History and the Marketing of Spartacus’. The arguments between the publicity side of the production company, represented by Jeff Livingston and Stan Margulies, and Professor Robinson on the other hand, illustrate very neatly the divide still observable between popular views and those of the academics.

Winkler in his introduction makes this point: ‘But the consensus of modern historians about Spartacus’ goals is significantly different from what the legendary or cinematic Spartacus wants to achieve’ (p. 11). Winkler quotes long passages from Erich Gruen and Keith Bradley, which state categorically that Spartacus and his followers wanted to escape slavery and nothing more there was no larger aim. This does indeed reflect the consensus among modern historians but I remain to be convinced that there is much to debate here. What seems a much more interesting issue is that, whatever the slaves may have wanted or intended, and this is surely irretrievable now, the effect of their rebellion may have been larger than their individual aims. This in any case would seem to be the approach of the ancient sources who saw the slave wars as far more threatening than scholars do.

For instance, Livingston wanted Robinson in the programme to suggest that the revolt helped to end the Roman empire (‘If you feel that Spartacus’ revolt contributed to the downfall of the great Roman Empire, please emphasize this’, quoted p. 224). Naturally Robinson refused to write such rubbish. But cheap laughs at the expense of the nonhistorian surely miss the point. If one substitutes ‘Republic’ for ‘Empire’ one not only reaches a far more sensible suggestion, but one put forward by many of our ancient sources themselves. No innocent reader could reach this conclusion with only the sources reproduced in this book, or from Brent Shaw’s similar collection of passages in translation ( Spartacus and the Slave Wars, Bedford, St Martins, 2001), as the extracts are all out of context. However, once they are read in their original surroundings, the views of people like Appian and Florus are clear: for them, the slave revolts were not simply an effect, but also a cause of the disintegration of the Republic.

One danger of discussing a historical film is an unconscious slippage from referring to the man as depicted by our original sources to the character on film or vice versa, so that sometimes it is not clear which Spartacus is being referred to. For instance, Winkler’s claim at the end of his earlier article (‘The Holy Cause of Freedom: American Ideals in Spartacus‘) that ‘Like Spartacus, John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King were killed by evil forces. But all three conquered death and became mythical icons of just causes. Their souls keep marching on.’ may have some validity with regard to the man portrayed by Kirk Douglas, since the revolutionary content was so reduced by the film, but none to the historical figure, however one might view him. The parallels simply are not there since Kennedy and King were both assassinated. Spartacus was killed having formed an army in order to fight against the Romans. He is either more of a criminal or more of a hero depending on your political persuasion, but he was an open enemy of the state.

Tatum’s article (‘The character of Marcus Licinius Crassus’) is a refreshing shift from the focus of Kirk Douglas’ character to that played by the glamorous Laurence Olivier. As he points out, the character in the film is not that found in the pages of Plutarch or Howard Fast, but one could argue that nevertheless the film is faithful to Plutarch in a broader way, since Crassus’ function is to be the main contrast with Spartacus. (‘Crassus’ character, although animated by Laurence Olivier’s compelling performance, is, in the end, simply Spartacus reversed’, p. 142). With his English accent and bisexuality, Crassus represented degeneration and helped audiences, at least in the US, know where their sympathies should lie.

My only criticism of the book is that the computer programme that created the bibliography seemed to have a problem with edited volumes so that they were listed under their titles and not their editors. The illustrations, mostly stills from the film and the posters, are not the usual ones but an excellent selection and well reproduced. There is much more to this book than I have discussed here and it made me remember why I found the subject so fascinating in the first place. This volume is invaluable for everyone interested in epic movies, the Roman Republic, the Cold War or the process of the appropriation of rebels.

Table of Contents

Introduction: Martin M. Winkler

1. Who Killed the Legend of Spartacus? Production, Censorship, and Reconstruction of Stanley Kubrick’s Epic Film: Duncan L. Cooper

2. Dalton Trumbo vs. Stanley Kubrick: The Historical Meaning of Spartacus: Duncan L. Cooper

3. Spartacus, Exodus, and Dalton Trumbo: Managing Ideologies of War: Frederick Ahl

4. Spartacus: History and Histrionics: Allen M. Ward

5. Spartacus, Rebel Against Rome: C. A. Robinson, Jr.

6. Training and Tactics = Roman Battle Success: From Spartacus: The Illustrated Story of the Motion Picture Production

7. The Character of Marcus Licinius Crassus: W. Jeffrey Tatum

8. Roman Slavery and the Class Divide: Why Spartacus Lost: Michael Parenti

9. The Holy Cause of Freedom: American Ideals in Spartacus: Martin M. Winkler

10. Spartacus and the Stoic Ideal of Death: Francisco Javier Tovar Paz

11. “Culturally Significant and Not Just Simple Entertainment”: History and the Marketing of Spartacus: Martin M. Winkler

The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down

Although he’s now best known for his 1996 novel, Infinite Jest, Wallace made his reputation, particularly among younger readers in the late ’90s, as an essayist and a very particular sort of journalist. His editors at Harper’s sent him to a state fair and on a holiday cruise, pastimes whose reputations for carefree, middle American fun seemed hopelessly alien to Wallace himself, a hyperactive observational machine desperate to shed his own self-consciousness but incapable of doing so. The results, included in this collection of essays, were hilarious and revelatory who knew it was even possible to write that way, to acknowledge how difficult it is for a certain kind of media-soaked mind to stop making associations and references, to forget itself? In these pieces, Wallace makes himself—and his doomed attempts to fit in and have a kind of fun he doesn’t really believe in—the butt of the joke, and a very funny joke it is (although less so in light of his suicide in 2008). This collection also includes some top-notch writing on tennis, and Wallace’s still-relevant essay on television and fiction, “E Unibus Pluram,” but the cruise ship and state fair pieces still shine the brightest.

The Mystery Of History, Volume 2: The Early Church and the Middle Ages

The Mystery of History Volume 2 continues the story of God's working in history with lessons that cover the early church that arose after the death of Christ (AD 33) through the Middle Ages and the invention of the printing press. This classical curriculum is written from a Christian, young-earth, perspective, and gives students insight into how the Gospel of Jesus is the mystery behind all of history! Written in a conversational style, many lessons are presented in the form of mini-biographies that integrate fascinating stories with the events of the time.

Arranged by semester, quarters, weeks and lessons, each quarter begins with an "Around the World" summary of events to introduce the time period lessons progress chronologically with each week having 3 lessons, a pretest, review, activities (including Memory Cards) and exercise or quiz. This book integrates the text with write-in activity pages these pages are reproducible for family use or students can write directly on the worksheets. The 84 lessons will take a year to complete if you follow a traditional 36 week school year (3 lessons per week).

Activities are broken down by age group and reinforce the material just learned through fun ideas that engage all learning styles they're based upon the classical grammar/logic/rhetoric stages. Review exercises cover the timeline and map work exercises quizzes are cumulative reviews that go over material from the very beginning of the course the semester-long tests are similar (though longer), covering materials from 2 quarters (one major time period). Quarter-end worksheets help students synthesize what they've learned and keep everyone's memory up to date! Suggested Schedules for different age groups are included, as well as plenty of reproducibles.

Line-listed answers included. 714 three-hole-punched and perforated pages. Softcover consumable worktext. Activity pages are reproducible for in-family use only. Grades 3-8, but adaptable for the family.

This is still the first edition of Volume II, but currently is the 7th printing, which features minor changes such as altered dates (29 AD to 33 AD).

American Sociological Review

American Sociological Review (ASR), the ASA's flagship journal, was founded in 1936 with the mission to publish original works of interest to the discipline of sociology in general, new theoretical developments, results of research that advance understanding of fundamental social processes, and important methodological innovations. Peer-reviewed and published bi-monthly, all areas of sociology are welcome, with emphasis on exceptional quality and general interest.

Featured article
When Religion Hurts: Structural Sexism and Health in Religious Congregations

Review: Volume 50 - History

Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) are persistent identifiers which can be used to consistently and accurately reference digital objects and/or content. The DOIs provide a way for the ADS resources to be cited in a similar fashion to traditional scholarly materials. More information on DOIs at the ADS can be found on our help page.

Citing this DOI

The updated Crossref DOI Display guidelines recommend that DOIs should be displayed in the following format:

Sample Citation for this DOI

Society for Medieval Archaeology (2007) Medieval Archaeology [data-set]. York: Archaeology Data Service [distributor] https://doi.org/10.5284/1000320

Data copyright © Society for Medieval Archaeology unless otherwise stated

This work is licensed under the ADS Terms of Use and Access.

Primary contact

Prof Chris M Gerrard
Department of Archaeology
Durham University
South Road

Resource identifiers

Digital Object Identifiers

Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) are persistent identifiers which can be used to consistently and accurately reference digital objects and/or content. The DOIs provide a way for the ADS resources to be cited in a similar fashion to traditional scholarly materials. More information on DOIs at the ADS can be found on our help page.

Citing this DOI

The updated Crossref DOI Display guidelines recommend that DOIs should be displayed in the following format:

Sample Citation for this DOI

Society for Medieval Archaeology (2007) Medieval Archaeology [data-set]. York: Archaeology Data Service [distributor] https://doi.org/10.5284/1000320

List Of Volumes

The following is a list of volumes of Medieval Archaeology currently held by the ADS, click on the Volume to see a list of all contents and to access the PDF files. If you would like to search for a specific volume, title, or author please use the query facility.

Winchester Model 50 Shotgun Review

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- Winchester made many autoloading shotguns in the Twentieth-Century.

One of their saddest mistakes, in my view, was their turning down of John Browning’s immortal Auto-5 recoil-operated design during its first decade, due to Browning’s desire to actually be paid a royalty on each one built.

This was not accepted by Winchester management, and they paid a price for this decision with lasting effects to this day.

Winchester Model 50 Shotgun

The Winchester Model 50 Shotgun is an interesting artifact. Other than the aluminum alloy trigger guard housing, the piece is constructed of machined, forged-steel parts. No less than David “Carbine” Williams (of WWII M1 Carbine fame) was responsible for the operating system, that used a “floating chamber insert” very similar in both design and execution of the more famous Colt “Service Model Ace” or their Government Model .22 “Conversion Unit” that allowed inexpensive practice once upon a time.

The Winchester Model 50 Shotgun represents a transition of technology of sorts. Up to this point, other than the aforementioned Auto-5, all repeating shotguns from Winchester used a tilting bolt that locked into a receiver mortise in its inside-top surface. Think “Winchester Model 12.” This is a very solid way to lock the bolt, but it is quite a bit more difficult to properly manufacture, compared to what is today’s standard, a bolt that locks into a barrel extension.

The Winchester Model 50 Shotgun is a technological “half-step.” In most recoil-operated arms, the bolt is delayed from rearward travel by the weight of the barrel that is affixed to it, and the barrel recoils a short distance with the locked bolt before the bolt’s timing allows it to disconnect from the barrel on its way back in full recoil.

The Model 50 Shotgun instead uses its floating chamber insert as the locking abutment as well as the piece that moves rearward, leaving the barrel “fixed.” As the bolt and insert move to the rear, a portion of the gases envelope the outside of the bottleneck-shaped insert that help “float” the assembly rearward via that gas pressure.

Being of fairly heavy construction due to recoil-operation, there are lots of critics who consider the design “too rear heavy,” “too difficult and time consuming to clean,” and “another sales failure.”

In my experience, the shotgun performed brilliantly on pesky starlings last fall. These birds are quite aerobatic, fast, and change flying tactics when they figure out you are out to get them. The muzzle lightness actually, for me anyway, made it quite reactive and quite the tool for the job.

While the Winchester Model 50 Shotgun is somewhat more difficult to clean that a “normal” repeater, stripping it for this requires unthreading a fore-end cap, removing the fore-end, locking the action open, and removing the barrel (by turning it ninety-degrees counter-clockwise) and the chamber insert. Simply clean the interior of the barrel as normal, and both the outside (primarily) and inside of the insert. Brush the bolt-face and receiver interior. I used Slip 2000 725 non-toxic, water-based carbon cleaner and re-lubricated with their “EWL” full-synthetic oil. I didn’t have any failures of cycling or feeding/extraction/ejection after nearly 350 rounds of shooting over a week-and-a-half of shooting. I suspect with the Poly Choke that was installed by a previous owner, that it will be equally deadly on the trap range.

In addition, the entire trigger group is retained by a single spring loaded pin. Push it out with a brass drift, and it opens up the entire receiver interior to inspection and cleaning, while it can be easily cleaned using spray lubricant and compressed air.

Finally, these shotguns were built from 1954-1959. There is a modicum of truth to it being a relatively slow seller, but that is also because it was truly a three-shot auto. The magazine is a machined tube limited in length to just two-round capacity, plus one up the spout. It is only a sporting upland or water-fowling piece, in other words. However, some 196,000 of them were sold, and Winchester never fully recovered from dissing Mr. Browning with its homespun autoloading designs.

One of the good things about the Winchester Model 50 Shotgun is that evidently spare barrels are relatively plentiful, do not require fitting to the receiver or chamber insert, and are relatively inexpensive.

Physically, I am resolutely “average” in size, and the drop at comb, trigger pull length, and drop at heel measurements are near perfect for my 5’10” frame. The Winchester Model 50 Shotgun and I got on perfectly well immediately, and I took it directly from the gunshop straight into the field without regrets.

History of Psychopharmacology

We live in an age of psychopharmacology. One in six persons currently takes a psychotropic drug. These drugs have profoundly shaped our scientific and cultural understanding of psychiatric disease. By way of a historical review, we try to make sense of psychiatry's dependency on psychiatric drugs in the care of patients. Modern psychopharmacology began in 1950 with the synthesis of chlorpromazine. Over the course of the next 50 years, the psychiatric understanding and treatment of mental illness radically changed. Psychotropic drugs played a major part in these changes as state hospitals closed and psychotherapy gave way to drug prescriptions. Our review suggests that the success of psychopharmacology was not the consequence of increasingly more effective drugs for discrete psychiatric diseases. Instead, a complex mix of political economic realities, pharmaceutical marketing, basic science advances, and changes in the mental health-care system have led to our current infatuation with psychopharmacology.