C06 General Principle

Which makes more sense to you?

The natural needs of some matter more than the needs of others.

OR

Natural needs exist as objective facts equally among everybody.

Anankelogy

My need to stop the bleeding from a laceration I just suffered is no more important than my neighbor’s need to quench their thirst. Both natural needs must be resolved in order to function. Lack of water objectively reduces function on par with a wound objectively reducing function.

Granted, stopping the bleeding feels far more urgent than a need to gulp down a glass of water. But urgency only suggests the need must be met promptly. It doesn’t mean it’s more important than a less urgent need. Individual functionality is not so easily zero sum.

For example, the fly caught in the spider’s web needs to break free from that web on par with the spider’s need for nutrition from that captured fly. Survival seems more urgent than merely a meal. But flies remain far more numerous than spiders. While zero sum in appearance, functionality at the level of the species is not so zero sum.

In the larger scheme of nature, the spider’s need to survive by eating the captured fly sits equal with the fly’s need to survive by breaking free from the spider’s web. Each other’s needs resolve and evolve to eventually balance out equally.

The more we ignore this principle, the easier we fall into trouble. We fight each other to try to force others to need differently. But reality never yields to our feel-reactive preferences. The more we recognize the equal stature of one another’s natural needs, the more we can all reach more of life’s missed potential.

Need-response

Judging from appearances, the more you experience your needs subjectively, the more you should be able to change how you experience them. With anankelogy distinguishing between the objective functionality of needs and the later subjective reporting of such diminished functionality, need-response adds a level of discipline missing in all other disciplines.

Reactive Problem

If public policy shaped by our politics and the judiciary assumes some natural needs exist more important than other natural needs, we quickly get ourselves into trouble. The objective need to function exists and persists on all sides to any conflict.

Sure, we can favor one side over another in some kind of legal or political settlement. But to expect the losing side to not suffer pain or any consequential problems is simply wrong. Two wrongs don’t make a right, but sometimes they make a law. Neglecting this innate equality of natural needs sparks all kinds of problems. Unfortunately, most institutions fail to enable us to resolve our different priority of needs.

Responsive Solution

Need-response provides a process to address each other’s different priority of needs. Need-response distinguishes between the needs themselves and what we can do about them. Need-response applies the higher moral standard of mutual regard and social love.

• mutual regard – considering the natural needs of others as equally important as your own, because they objectively are.

• social love – putting another’s need ahead of your own for a moment, to inspire them to put your need ahead of theirs.

We must not confuse or conflate our objective difference in priorities with arbitrary favoritism of some folk’s needs over others. Your natural priority of needs exists as an objective fact for your functioning on par with my priority of needs, even if those priorities contradict.

If I naturally require less government involvement in my rural community life, my unchosen priority exists on par with the suburbanite requiring more government supports. If I naturally require more government supports, my unchosen priority exists on par with those requiring less government involvement.

The more we stop fighting with the power of nature to restore each to full functioning, the less we slip into trouble. The more we support each other to resolve needs, with minimal to no impediment to resolving our own needs, the better we all can be.

Responding to your needs

How does this principle speak to your experience of needs? Post in our Engagement forum your thoughtful response to one of these:

• How can my need to stop a war from killing all my friends be equal to the other side’s needs?

• What’s the best way to distinguish between urgency and a natural priority of a need?

• What can I do about authorities imposing their needs ahead of my own?

• Is there anything I can do to resolve my needs if others keep prioritizing theirs at my expense?

Instead of selecting one of these, post your own engagement feedback about your experience with the subject of this principle. Remember the aim is to improve our responsiveness to each other’s needs, toward their full resolution. If you’re new at posting here, first check the guide below.