1. How did he current theory emerge, and what is it? 

Every person, sooner or later, feels the desire to learn more about themselves, others, and, in general, the reasons why people do the things they do.

When this desire matures and the individual begins to seek information, they inevitably encounter a problem: the problem called popular psychology.

The presence of various subjectively interpreted theses, assertions, and conjectures, along with unprovable, highly subjective, and open-to-interpretation trends in psychology on one hand, combined with the popularization of numerous unscientific theories, has led to the unfair perception of psychology as a pseudoscience.

Additionally, people have the tendency to explain the world through stories. And when science is unable to provide an explanation, we seek answers in stories.

Religion is good at providing stories.

People’s need to search for meaning and answers about his own life, often find comfort in religion.

And there’s nothing wrong with that. Religions have long proven their value in various areas, such as uniting people, building a moral compass in individuals, instilling hope in difficult times, and more.

It becomes worse when a person starts seeking answers in far less beneficial directions that also offer intuitively acceptable stories. Such are astrology, fortune-telling, and divination, as well as other outright charlatan practices that various individuals have developed and popularized over the years for profit.

But when one needs to understand in order to know what to do, the solutions that religion and the other mentioned fields provide, although often intuitively acceptable, rarely withstand the scrutiny of scientific knowledge on one hand, and on the other, do not always offer specific, practically applicable prescriptions for productive, everyday behaviors.

However, information is useful only when it is applicable and usable for future behaviors and choices.

In other words, when it offers the opportunity to make informed choices with a certain degree of confidence that the information we rely on when making them guarantees us predictive certainty. When it allows us to foresee future outcomes with some assurance.

It’s no coincidence that there are principles for analyzing information (such as the “principle of falsifiability of information”).

With the identification of the mentioned problem, the need crystallized for someone to conduct a kind of interdisciplinary fact-checking to provide a meaningful alternative to religions (I won’t even mention the other directions), which would actually resonate on an intuitive level with people, offering the much-desired scientific explanation of the human factor, while at the same time presenting it in an accessible, non-scientific language that answers the question, “Now that I understand, what can I do?”

Thus, the present theory was born.

It is a result of meta-analysis (the study of numerous other studies) on the established in recent decades (a period during which technological advancements made it possible to conduct in-depth research into the human body, brain, nervous system, and behavior) conclusions in seven specific fields.

These fields are:

• Psychometrics: The science studying personality.
• Social Psychology and Sociology: Sciences that explore socio-psychological phenomena and group dynamics.
• Neurosciences: A combination of disciplines examining significant connections between the nervous system, genetics, biochemistry, and physiology related to human behavior.
• Industrial/Organizational Psychology: The branch of psychology applying principles and research methods to understand human behavior in organizations, aiming to enhance well-being and efficiency.
• Evolutionary Psychology and Anthropology: Intersections between the science addressing potential evolutionary phenomena leading to current human psychophysiological development, and the field studying humans, their ancestors, and related primates, focusing on their biological, cultural, social, and linguistic development and variations over time and space.

These fields were chosen because the first five provide the most scientifically substantiated experiments and evidence in psychology and human behavior, or in areas meaningfully connected to them. Evolutionary Psychology and Anthropology on the other hand, manage to present, in a sufficiently logical and well-founded manner, the possible cause-and-effect relationships of things for which there is not enough objective data available.

The primary goal of the mentioned research was to identify scientifically proven constructs, assertions, phenomena, and conclusions in these fields that overlap and mutually confirm each other.

The aim of this theory is to explain the causal relationships underlying how people feel, think, choose, speak, and act—in other words, to explain why people are the way they are.

Although it stems from scientific work, the theory is written in a popular, non-scientific language, with the specific intent to reach as many people as possible, enabling them to derive real benefits for their lives. It deliberately excludes the mentioned research and does not aim to have a scientific-representative format.

2.

In Search of the Meaning of Life

Since the oldest times, people have sought meaning — meaning in life and in their existence. 

Meaning and answer to the question “why?”:

• Why do we suffer?
• Why do we rejoice?
• Why do we love?
• Why do we feel certain ways?
• Why do we do the things we do?
• Why do we succeed or fail in achieving our goals?
• Why are others the way they are?

These and many other similar concerns all begin with the question “why?”.

This is not surprising. 

The world, with its natural conditions, does not offer an easy life. 

On one hand, there are harsh climatic conditions. 

On the other, all species (including humans) inhabit the same territory where resources are limited, placing them in competition for survival. 

All of this often subjects us, humans, to suffering and prompts us to seek an explanation for it, so that it does not turn out that our lives are meaningless, but rather that we find the strength to continue living and pursuing our goals despite this suffering and all the difficulties that give rise to it.

This very pursuit for explanation and meaning has led you to this theory. 

Its purpose is to provide a deep understanding of the causal relationships in human behavior—in other words, to answer the existential questions humans have asked since time immemorial.

Our ability to understand people is crucial for yet another reason. 

Everything in a person’s life can be traced back to something they or someone else did, said, or decided (or did not do, say, or decide). 

This means that understanding people and the reasons behind their actions, thoughts, words, and choices is perhaps the most important knowledge for understanding how our lives unfold in the modern social world.

And as with any deep understanding, this of humans, should begin with the basics…

3.

For us humans, everything begins with our needs

As previously mentioned, the world is a harsh place.

Although we currently sit atop the food pyramid, our physiology isn’t particularly competitive.

In potential physical confrontations with other species, our strength, agility, teeth, nails, and easily injured bodies aren’t highly advantageous.

Additionally, we lack tusks, venom, horns, spikes, and other advantages that many other species possess.

Moreover, our physical endurance, resistance to diseases and infections, and ability to survive long periods without food and water aren’t particularly high, making us vulnerable to harsh climatic conditions and challenging environments.

As if that weren’t enough, we also have to compete among ourselves, both on interpersonal and intergroup levels, due to the previously mentioned scarcity of resources.

All this makes our lives a series of constant challenges.

The number of these challenges is indeed vast, but they often share similarities in type, origin, and characteristics.

This makes dealing with them easier.

In practice, a person doesn’t have to deal with hundreds of challenges, but rather with a few groups of challenges that share common characteristics, origins, and types.

These groups of challenges can be logically classified and reduced (based on similarities) to 18 in number.

A person’s ability to handle these 18 groups of challenges determines their capacity to survive as a species.

On the other hand, this turns the necessity of dealing with these 18 groups of challenges into a primary driving force—something that every person must constantly and universally do, without which their existence becomes extremely difficult.

For this reason, we consider addressing each of these groups of challenges as a need.

It’s worth noting that, although the world we live in has changed significantly over millennia, especially in recent centuries due to human intervention and industrial development, the needs embedded in our neurobiology have not changed.

In other words, these needs remain the same; only their specific manifestations in our daily lives have drastically transformed.

So how does a person satisfy these needs?

The answer is always the same—through their actions (or inactions).

This also answers the question of why a person does what they do—to fulfill their needs.

To truly understand this statement and to confirm its validity, we should take a step back and examine how everything functions within and around a person, explaining the so-called “human nature.”

 

4.

Genes, DNA, the Socio-Functional Essence of Human Nature, and Its Role in Satisfying Needs

Over millennia, evolution has equipped humans with mechanisms to tackle mentioned earlier various groups of challenges, enabling only the most adaptive to survive, continue reproducing, and pass on their genes from generation to generation.

We refer to these specific mechanisms as “Human Nature.”

On one hand, human nature is biologically determined by the biochemical processes in the body and human physiology; on the other, it is socially influenced, as humans live in groups to more effectively handle challenges. This cohabitation in groups necessitates that some of these coping mechanisms have a social orientation and are heavily influenced by society.

For this reason, we call the mechanisms for dealing with challenges (and accordingly satisfying needs) “Socio-Functional” and assert that human nature is socio-functional in its essence.

So far, so good, you might say, but how does it all actually work?

As mentioned earlier, addressing the aforementioned groups of challenges is a need that every person must satisfy to survive.

To achieve this, we all have an inherent “program.”

Continuing the thought on social functionality, this program is influenced both by our biological predispositions and by the phenomena we encounter throughout our lives, including social ones.

But where does this “program” come from?

We can think of it as a combination of the genes inherited from our parents and the influences that life circumstances (environment, other people, and events we participate in) have on us.

Together, they shape this “program.”

We can think of genes as manuals with instructions for building and managing our bodies. Imagine the body as a complex machine with many parts, and the genes are the instructions that tell the machine how to operate.

Each gene is composed of a special code called DNA.

This code contains all the information necessary for creating, functioning, and controlling something specific in our body.

For example, there are genes that instruct our bodies on how to make our hair curly or straight or how to fight infections.

Another example is genes related to the production and regulation of stress hormones like adrenaline and cortisol. They can influence how our body responds to stress and activate a “fight or flight” program in dangerous situations.

We inherit our genes from our parents.

We receive half of our genes from our mother and half from our father.

That’s why we may resemble each of them to some extent—due to inheriting some of their genes.

However, these genes can be activated during our lives as a result of our interactions with the surrounding world, or they may remain “passive.”

This is also why we might not resemble our parents at all (visually, functionally, or behaviorally).

A vast majority of the genes we inherit from our parents are very similar.

This helps all humans have a “coping program” for the same 18 needs.

On the other hand, differences between people in the context of genes generally come from three places:

• Gene Variations: Depending on the genes of each parent and their life circumstances, children may sometimes inherit and activate genes with structural changes, leading to certain differences (e.g., different physical traits like eye color or body size and shape, susceptibility to certain diseases or mental disorders, variations in responses to stimuli and medications, etc.).
• Gene Expression: Depending on a person’s interaction with the environment and others, some genes are activated while others are not. Moreover, the ways in which genes are activated can vary, offering a diverse palette of possible manifestations. Unique life circumstances can cause different genes to be activated in different people and in different ways.
• Gene Mutations: Sometimes, individuals carry rare genetic mutations not found in the general population. Some of these mutations can be inherited from parents, while others arise spontaneously and are absent in the DNA of either parent. Rare mutations can lead to genetic diseases and/or unexpected conditions.

Additionally, differences between people can result from life circumstances’ influences at a non-genetic level. These are cases where our interactions with the environment and others don’t change our genetic makeup but have a real impact on how we feel, think, act, and speak.

Here are some examples of such influences:

• Diet: The way we eat, diets, nutritional supplements, medications we take, and hydration levels we maintain.
• Natural Environment: The natural environment we live in and the direct physical influences we are subjected to (such as atmospheric and climatic conditions, etc.).
• Social Surroundings: The social circles we move in and the daily interactions we have.
• Cultural Environment: The cultural environment that surrounds us most of the time.

Thus, despite similarities in genes, some people are more successful in satisfying certain needs, while others excel in others, due to different gene expressions on one hand and different life circumstances that influence their neurobiology, psyche, habits, understandings, and overall personality on the other.

Understanding that this combination is the source of differences in how people think, feel, speak, and behave clarifies why individuals are different.

To complete this understanding of similarity and difference, consider the following:

The commonality among all people is that each person possesses all the mentioned mechanisms (serving to satisfy needs).

Therefore, we often refer to these mechanisms as “universal characteristics of human nature.”

Differences between people, on the other hand, are due to the degree and strength with which each of these characteristics manifests in the individual.

We can think of this “manifestation” as a scale from 0% to 100%.

The less a specific group of characteristics is manifested in a given person, the closer they are to 0%. Consequently, their ability to satisfy the given need (which that group of characteristics serves) is lower.

Conversely, the more strongly it is manifested, the closer they are to 100%, and accordingly, the more capable the person is of satisfying that particular need.

It is important to clarify that it is very rare for all characteristics serving a particular need to be strongly manifested in one person.

In other words, it is completely normal for not every group of characteristics to be strongly manifested in a person, simply because the individual characteristics in the group have varying degrees of manifestation.

This provides an explanation for the concept of “norm,” describing the fact that the majority of people are in an average position regarding most characteristics, and it is less common to observe people exhibiting extremes in some of the characteristics.

But more on that later…

For now, it is important to note that the way people experience the manifestations of the mentioned mechanisms is often deeply subconscious. 

This means that unless a person proactively makes serious efforts toward self-awareness, they often do not understand why they think, act, speak, and choose the things that become part of their life—they simply happen “automatically.”

After everything said so far, and to complete the overall understanding of the essence of human nature, we come to the point where we should examine the aforementioned 18 needs.

5,

The 18 Universal Human Needs

 

We’ll begin with a brief clarification.

Although we refer to the universal human needs as being 18 in number, it’s appropriate to categorize them into two groups: primary and secondary.

• Primary needs: There are 10, each serving our survival in one way or another.
• Secondary needs: There are 8, representing the necessity to utilize certain mechanisms to satisfy the primary needs. Despite acting as “tools” for fulfilling primary needs, their limited nature (being all we have to meet our primary needs) turns them into needs themselves—the need to be utilized.

Thus, the total of 10 primary plus 8 secondary constitutes the 18 needs.

To build a more comprehensive understanding, we’ll list them and then examine each individually.

Here is the list of all 18 needs:

Primary Needs:

1. Need for intimacy (To continue the species)
2. Need for balance between our body and the environment (To maintain “homeostasis”)
3. Need for energy (To acquire resources)
4. Need for variety and stimulation (To explore the world)
5. Need for predictability (To deal with change)
6. Need for security (To protect ourselves from harm)
7. Need to be healthy (To avoid infections and toxic/unhealthy influences)
8. Need for pleasure (To identify what is beneficial)
9. Need for achievement (To pursue the beneficial in the future)
10. Need for attention (To gain / keep social status)

Secondary Needs (and their associated groups of mechanisms):

1. Need to establish and regulate our interaction with the surrounding environment on a purely physiological level. (Physiological mechanisms for coping with challenges)
2. Need for something to drive us toward satisfying our needs. (Emotional mechanisms for coping with challenges)
3. Need to coexist in groups to enhance our ability to meet our needs. (Social mechanisms for coping with challenges)
4. Need to make sense of ourselves and the world. (Intellectual mechanisms for coping with challenges)
5. Need to identify the influence of others on our needs and to be motivated toward satisfying them in interpersonal interactions. (Interpersonal sensitivity)
6. Need to meet our needs through pro-social behaviors—in harmony with the needs of the group and its members. (Socially adaptive behavioral mechanisms for coping with challenges)
7. Need to meet our needs despite the group and its members—in opposition to their needs. (Socially maladaptive behavioral mechanisms for coping with challenges)
8. Need to select the environment, circumstances, and surroundings that serve our needs. (Core Values as a mechanism for coping with challenges)

 

Now that we have the full list, we can proceed to the detailed examination of each need separately.

As you will notice, the order in which we will address them is intended to provide a logical explanation that resonates on an intuitive level.

In other words, as promised at the beginning, it will offer us a story that not only makes sense but is also supported by the scientific fields described at the beginning of the theory.

 

6.

The Socio-Functional History of Humanity

Although in our view, we humans are often the center of the universe, for the universe itself, we are not.
Humans, like all other living beings and inanimate objects, are subject to universal physical laws.
To exist simultaneously without mutually destroying one another upon collision (due to the natural state of chaos inherent in energy behavior), all objects in the universe adhere to certain fundamental physical principles that regulate their interactions.

Such physical principles are described by the laws of thermodynamics, which examine the behavior of energy within the universe.

Without delving into detail, as physics is not the subject of this theory, we will summarize briefly: the ultimate phenomenon (or result) described by the laws of thermodynamics is that the characteristic behavior of energy is chaotic dispersion. For objects to exist within the universe, they must counteract this chaotic dispersion by maintaining a stable structure over time through a specific state of balance with one another, which is called equilibrium.

This is significant because the described state of balance characterizes the interactions between all stable objects in the universe across all scales.

By “stable over time,” we mean objects that possess a structure that withstands external influences and remains relatively unchanged.
Practically, any object with such a lasting structure over time can be regarded as a system functioning in interaction with other systems.

This state of balance is achieved within the context of interactions between individual systems.

Regardless of the scale—whether galactic, planetary, ecological and biological, social, individual, or even microscopic (molecular and atomic levels)—systems always aim to exist in a state of balance with one another.

In other words, we can say that the fundamental goal of every object in the universe, in order to exist, is to maintain a state of balance with other objects it interacts with.

This understanding is useful because it informs us that anything in an extreme state—understood as unbalanced—will, sooner or later, either undergo change toward balancing with its surrounding environment or cease to exist in its current form. 

Sometimes, this change toward balance is directed inward—the “thing” changes itself—while at other times, it is directed outward—the “thing” changes its surrounding environment.

To summarize: all enduring systems operate in a constant pursuit of balance.

Since the purpose of this theory is to describe why humans are the way they are, a meaningful approach within the context of balance would be to examine how humans, as a system, interact with all other systems they come into contact with to achieve the necessary levels of balance for their existence.

One way to do this is to systematically analyze the systems humans interact with, starting from the larger and moving to the smaller.

The largest systems humans interact with are on a cosmic scale. This means humans directly and/or indirectly feel the influence of other systems within the galaxy in which planet Earth is located.
Examples of such interactions include solar flares, the positioning of other planets, satellites, and generally cosmic objects in relation to Earth.
To transition from theoretical explanation to practice, we must point out that for humans, interactions with these systems have real impacts on daily life in the form of various phenomena they must take into account.

Such phenomena, for example, include tides, day and night, certain climatic changes, solar flares, and others.

For this reason, considering scale, galactic interaction is the first meaningful aspect in the context of shaping humans as they are through millennia of evolution.

However, for humans, the influence of galactic systems occurs in the same way as the influence of the next, smaller scale of interaction—planetary interaction.

For humans, these two interactions are experienced physically—through their physical bodies. Humans interact with their surrounding environment through their bodies and perceive changes in it (whether these changes come from their planet or cosmic phenomena) via their senses and through the reactions that occur in their bodies when a change takes place.

As outlined at the beginning of the theory, part of the challenges in human life (as well as in the lives of other biological species) stems precisely from interaction with the surrounding environment and its harsh nature.

This is why millennia of evolution have provided various biological species with numerous physical (bodily) mechanisms to cope with the challenges of this harsh environment, sustaining stable levels of balance between themselves and it.

For humans (and not only humans), these mechanisms are all those physiological systems in the body that enable them to survive and function adaptively. (These include the motor, sensory, nervous, cardiovascular, digestive, excretory, immune, respiratory, reproductive systems, and more.)

We refer to these systems as “Physiological Mechanisms for Coping with Challenges.”

(Reference for this group of mechanisms: they belong to need 11—the need to establish and regulate interactions with the surrounding environment on a purely physiological level.)

Practically, these are the internal mechanisms within the human body that serve to meet its (our) needs.

So far, so good, but all of this raises a meaningful question: How do biological species “know” which of these interactions with the surrounding environment benefit them and which – harm them?

Evolution had to offer a solution to guide them—a sort of “compass” to indicate which phenomena “work for them” and which “work against them.”

This solution is emotional experiences (the combination of feelings, emotions, and moods).

These experiences “activate” as a result of interactions with the external world and have a motivating (driving) effect.

This driving effect works in two directions—towards the beneficial and against the harmful.

In different biological species, emotional experiences take different forms and manifestations, but at their core, they always revolve around this dual nature—”beneficial” or “harmful,” “good” or “bad,” “for” or “against,” “towards” or “away from,” “more” or “less” in the context of a given phenomenon.

Depending on the complexity of different life forms and the level of development of their nervous systems, emotional experiences can reflect varying levels of impact and prompt different responses.

It is believed that the richest palette of emotional experiences is characteristic of humans (at least, this is suggested by the data available to us at the present).

In other words, humans experience a wide range of positive emotional experiences towards different phenomena beneficial to their survival and functioning, as well as a wide range of negative emotional experiences towards various phenomena harmful to their survival and functioning.

An important clarification here is that for each specific need, there is a corresponding emotional mechanism (e.g., fear for security, disgust for health, etc.).

These emotional experiences are activated with varying intensity, frequency, strength, and duration, prompting action through electrical impulses from the brain and nervous system towards the motor system (and/or other physiological systems). These impulses vary in strength depending on how strongly a particular phenomenon affects the individual and how subjectively significant the phenomenon is for their specific needs.

Thus, in general, emotional mechanisms drive humans toward reactions (responsiveness to events) aimed at meeting their needs.

We call these emotional experiences “Emotional Mechanisms for Coping with Challenges.”

(Reference for the group of mechanisms described earlier: they belong to need 12—the need for something to motivate us to satisfy our needs.)

Continuing the thought about the planetary scale, we inevitably arrive at the idea of interaction between different biological species inhabiting the same planet.

Although this interaction is complex, multilayered, and diverse, from an evolutionary perspective, it is fundamentally built on the already mentioned principle of balance.
For species to function normally, they must maintain a certain balance in their interactions with one another if they wish to survive.

Though it might sound counterintuitive, this balance is often associated with competition.

This is no coincidence — on the one hand, there are limited resources within any finite territory, and all inhabitants of that territory need them in one form or another.

When the consumption of these resources by the population exceeds availability, some will have enough, while others will not.

On the other hand, some species are better equipped to acquire these resources due to the specific characteristics of their physiology and functioning.

These two facts automatically create a competitive scenario for the available resources, in which those better equipped to obtain them survive, while the others do not.

In nature, this competition takes place on a primary physical level.

In other words — the stronger prevails.

However, some species lack a competitive physiology.

In the event of a physical confrontation, their strength, mobility, teeth, claws, and fragile bodies are not very competitive.

Additionally, not all species have advantages like tusks, venom, horns, spikes, and other physical traits that certain species possess.

Moreover, not all species have high physical endurance, resistance to infections, and the ability to survive long periods without food and water, making them easy prey for other species inhabiting the same territory.

In other words, they are unable to maintain the desired balance.

Since it is impossible for all species to be equally competitive on a purely physical level, evolution needed to “arm” these weaker species with another “weapon” to give them a chance to survive as a species in the constant interspecies competition.

This task was effectively fulfilled through the phenomenon we call “herd behavior” (group living).

Practically, some species began to group together, cooperate to address challenges, and even coexist as groups, passageс, or herds. This allowed them, through their numerical advantage, to better meet their needs and compete with other species.

In this way, despite their physically non-competitive traits, evolution provided some species (including humans) with mechanisms that drive them toward a group (cooperative) way of life.
In different species, these mechanisms vary and manifest differently. For example, wolves group and coexist in one way, monkeys in another, and various herbivores in yet another.

Such distinctions are also observed in the ways humans group and coexist with others. Over millennia of evolution, we have developed a set of specific mechanisms enabling us to seek out and join groups of people, as well as to function within these groups to improve our chances of addressing challenges and satisfying our needs through the group and its members.

We call these group mechanisms “Social Mechanisms for Coping with Challenges.”

(Reference for the group of mechanisms described earlier: they belong to need 13 — the need to coexist in groups to improve the ability to satisfy our needs.)

So far, so good, you might say, but the fact is that not only humans function in groups. This raises the question of what happens when human groups have to compete with groups of other social species.

Although today humans are at the top of the food chain, from an evolutionary perspective, this position was achieved only after another important step in human development as a species.

This step was the development of human intelligence to significantly higher levels compared to other biological species.
To fully understand the significance of intelligence, however, we need to discuss a few additional points.

The earlier described emotional and physiological mechanisms “push” humans in different directions depending on the situation. This is often a primitive and non-adaptive way of dealing with challenges, as it drives them toward the immediate satisfaction of a specific need “here and now.”
This “here and now,” while addressing immediate needs, does not account for different circumstances, past events and the lessons from them, future possibilities, the interrelations between phenomena, or the importance of other people and other species.

This creates the need for another group of mechanisms that give humans the ability to process the flow of information coming through their senses as a result of interaction with the surrounding world.
These are mechanisms that enable humans to make sense of the world and their interactions with it in the context of:

• The past (memory): Retaining lessons learned.
• The present (awareness): Understanding the current situation.
• The predictable future (anticipation): Planning for possible outcomes.
• The unpredictable future (imagination): Preparing for uncertainty.
• Other significant beings (consideration): Acknowledging the importance of other people, species, and entities relevant to one’s needs.
• Attention and focus: Concentrating on what matters most.
• Cause-and-effect relationships (logic): Understanding how phenomena are interconnected.

These mechanisms aim to improve the individual’s ability to handle challenges and, consequently, to better satisfy their needs.

This specific group of mechanisms also makes possible the process of self-awareness and the understanding of one’s own existence in the context of the surrounding world, its phenomena, and the timeline of their existence.
They provide humans with a degree of self-control and influence over their emotions and actions, enabling them to more adaptively satisfy their needs while considering their internal states.

These mechanisms, in fact, are what position humans on evolutionarily higher levels compared to other animal species.

We call this described group of intellectual functions “Intellectual Mechanisms for Coping with Challenges.”

(Reference for the described group of mechanisms earlier: they belong to need 14 — the need to understand ourselves and the world.)

Returning to the tendency for group living, we must address a significant consequence of this coexistence. The individual members of each group, within it, must find a way to maintain the balance described earlier in their interactions with one another if they are to survive and function effectively.

This creates the need for group members to identify and evaluate the influence of others in the group as either beneficial or harmful. Consequently, they are driven toward more beneficial interactions and fewer harmful influences in interpersonal relationships.

This process is similar to what was described earlier with emotional mechanisms for coping with challenges. Humans experience emotional responses (both positive and negative) toward other people. These emotional experiences then drive them to interact with others in various ways.

We call these experiences “Interpersonal Sensitivity.”

(Reference for the described group of mechanisms: they belong to need 15 — the need to identify the influence of others on our needs and move toward satisfying them in interpersonal interactions.)

However, for a person to function successfully in a group, it is not enough to simply find a group and join it. Nor is it sufficient to distinguish between the influences that other group members have on them.

Based on the initial concept of balance between all “interacting systems,” the group is no exception. To achieve balance within a group (among its individual members), it is necessary to consider not only the influences that group members have on the individual but also the influence that the individual, in turn, exerts on the other members of the group.

In other words, for a person to continue benefiting from the advantages of living in a group, the group must also accept them and derive value from their membership.

This creates the need for a group of mechanisms that drive individuals toward behaviors in the context of coexistence with others, which make them useful and, consequently, help them be accepted by the group.

In this way, they contribute to the balance between themselves and the other members of the group.
For this to happen, these behaviors must serve not only to satisfy the individual’s needs but also to help meet the needs of the other group members—or at least not hinder the latter.

We call this group of mechanisms “Social-Adaptive Behaviors.”

(Reference for the described group of mechanisms: they belong to need 16 — the need to satisfy our needs through pro-social behaviors aligned with the needs of the group and its members.)

However, life in a group often leads to an unpleasant consequence for individuals — the group imposes certain requirements that are acceptable to it but are often detrimental to the individual’s personal needs.

Since personal needs are inherently prioritized for survival, this creates the need for a group of mechanisms that help individuals meet their needs despite social expectations and group influences..

In other words, these are behaviors within the context of coexisting with others that restore balance for the individual when group-imposed circumstances work against their individual  needs.

We call this group of mechanisms “Socially-Maladaptive Behaviors.”

(Reference for the described group of mechanisms: they belong to need 17 — the need to satisfy our needs despite the group and its members, in opposition to their needs.)

This constant pursuit of balance between oneself, the environment, and others leads to an intriguing consequence.
Each person grows up under different life circumstances, influenced by various factors that shape their coping mechanisms as described earlier in this narrative.

Such life circumstances include family, social surroundings, cultural specifics, political trends, and more. These, in turn, lead to a reality where the world appears differently to each individual depending on the unique circumstances they’ve experienced.

Depending on the “pressing” needs during early phases of life, certain circumstances become important, significant, preferred, and interesting for some people, while “the picture” is completely different for others.

In other words, for each person, life represents a unique “palette” of experiences. This palette, through the intellectual and emotional mechanisms described earlier, builds a distinct “filter” through which they begin to see and interpret the world and everything that happens within it.

This results in the formation of specific beliefs, attitudes, preferences, and interests related to what is perceived as good, useful, valuable and interesting in the context of their needs.
Thus, the last group of mechanisms for coping with challenges is formed.

We call this group of mechanisms “Core Values.”

(Reference for the described group of mechanisms: they belong to need 18 — the need to select our environment, circumstances, and surroundings in a way that serves our needs.)

The interesting thing about this group of mechanisms is that if a person finds themselves in circumstances that are not aligned with their core values, they experience negative emotional reactions. 

Conversely, in the opposite scenario, they experience positive emotions.

This means that individuals naturally feel the need to place themselves in the “right” circumstances (places, activities, social circles, partners, etc.) that align with and support their leading core values if they want to lead a satisfying life. 

When that happens, people experience the subjective experiences, which we call “Happiness”.

With this, our exploration of the secondary universal human needs — or in other words, the mechanisms through which we meet our primary needs — concludes.

Now it’s time to move on to the most fundamental part — the primary needs.

If we momentarily return to the introduction about the meaning of life, the truth is that the number of ways to discover meaning is as diverse as the number of people.

And yet, for a person, his life to have any meaning at all, that person must first exist — they must be born into this world!

However, the individual rarely contemplates this aspect.

We don’t often think of ourselves as a biological species.

Therefore, the continuation of the species is often not viewed as an evolutionary or biological imperative but rather as a personal choice influenced by various understandings, policies, trends, fashions, and biases.

In this context, it’s important to emphasize that the survival of humans as a species is a prerequisite for the pursuit of any kind of meaning.

The first step toward this is reproduction.

This brings us to the evolutionary goal of all biological species, including humans: to reproduce and thus contribute to the survival of their species.
If humanity fails to achieve this goal, it will simply vanish from the face of the Earth.

In light of this, it becomes evident that, on a deep biological level, the “meaning of life” is the continuation of the species.

This makes achieving this evolutionary goal the first of the deeply rooted motives (primary needs) of all living beings.

We call this group of mechanisms “Intimacy.”

(Associated need served by the group of mechanisms called “Intimacy”: 1. The need to ensure the continuation of the species.)

Once a person is born (i.e., their parents have achieved their evolutionary goal of reproduction), a whole new world of challenges unfolds before them.

These challenges inherently activate the rest of their needs. In the context of the established understanding of the importance of needs, it’s no coincidence that one of the first challenges a person faces upon entering the world is the need to begin satisfying these needs.

Thus, we arrive at the idea that satisfying needs itself should be viewed as a need.

How does a person “understand” or sense that their needs are unmet?

As discussed earlier, every living organism in nature can be viewed as a system existing within a larger system.

In the case of humans, they are a system existing within the surrounding world.

In nature, there is a phenomenon called “Homeostasis.” This is the constant drive of every “living” system (including humans) to maintain balance between its internal environment and the external environment.

In this regard, humans, like other living organisms, are characterized by a constant striving for homeostasis.

In other words, this is the pursuit of harmony with the environment (nature and society), balancing between what is received from it (such as physiological conditions, resources, opportunities, and attitudes from others) and what is given back (such as influences, behaviors, value, choices, and attitudes).

Every time a person’s homeostasis (balance) is disrupted, certain mechanisms are triggered that signal unmet needs, prompting action to restore balance.

We call this group of mechanisms “Dissatisfaction.”

(Associated need served by the group of mechanisms called “Dissatisfaction”: 2. The need to maintain a state of homeostasis.)

Maintaining the aforementioned homeostasis is linked to the expenditure of energy, which is finite within the human body and depletes after a certain period (which varies for each individual).

To continue functioning, humans need ways to manage this energy.
Through these methods, a person preserves, redirects, and prioritizes energy expenditure (until it is replenished) only for the “most important” (subjectively) needs, and they restore energy after depletion.

Both the management of energy in the human body and its regeneration are processes tied to various resources that humans obtain from interactions with their environment.

Such resources include nutrients, vitamins, minerals, other microelements, water, oxygen, sunlight, and more.

It is precisely in situations involving the acquisition, preservation, and management of these resources, as well as the regeneration of energy through their absorption, that the mechanisms serving this need are activated.

We call this group of mechanisms “Resourcefulness.”

(Associated need served by the group of mechanisms called “Resourcefulness”: 3. The need for energy/ resources.)

The described need for resources implies that, in order to find such resources in the environment and/or through interaction with others, a person must actively search for them. Resources do not simply come to people on their own.

This generates the need for a person to explore the world and the unknown, thus exposing themselves to new circumstances: new information, new territories, new social contacts, new sensory experiences, or, broadly speaking, any kind of new stimulation. This stimulation may ultimately lead to the discovery of the necessary resources.

To achieve this, nature has endowed humans with a group of mechanisms that drive them toward obtaining this stimulation by exploring the unknown.

We call this group of mechanisms “Openness to Experience.”

(Associated need served by the group of mechanisms called “Openness to Experience”: 4. The need for variety and stimulation.)

The aforementioned tendency to explore the world “condemns” humans to constant changes.

Changes in circumstances and social contacts, as well as in the challenges they must face.

These changes occur constantly, are unpredictable, and bring with them new challenges and risks.

This generates the need to cope with such changes—in other words, the need to adapt to them.

Not all changes (and the challenges they bring) are manageable for every person.

For some, it is harder to adapt “on the go” to changes.

The more difficult it is for a person to adapt “on the go,” the greater their need for predictability and structure to better manage the challenges brought by these changes.

In other words, if they cannot adapt, the solution is to anticipate and prepare in advance.

This is a result of the fact that change does not wait or ask how capable a person is of adapting; it simply happens.

If a person is unable to cope with a certain change and its accompanying challenges, there is a real risk that this inability may harm them.

For this reason, nature and society have equipped humans with a group of mechanisms that help them cope with incoming changes. This is achieved through a combination of adaptability and a structured approach, allowing them to make the best of their capabilities at any given moment to succeed in overcoming challenges.

We call this group of mechanisms “Adaptability.”

(Associated need served by the group of mechanisms called “Adaptability”: 5. The need to cope with change.)

As previously mentioned, the inability to manage certain challenges presents a real risk of being detrimental to humans.

Moreover, with change often come real dangers to a person’s security, health, and well-being.

This, combined with the harsh reality of the world we live in (as described earlier), generates the need for a group of mechanisms that help humans avoid risks and dangerous behaviors to protect themselves from harm caused by the environment, other people, and animals.

We call this group of mechanisms “Caution.”

(Associated need served by the group of mechanisms called “Caution”: 6. The need to protect oneself from harm.)

The existence of various bacteria, microbes, and other pathogens, combined with the toxins of different animal and plant species and numerous negative influences (including social behaviors), poses threats to human health.

These threats often remain undetected by the previously mentioned mechanisms that protect humans from harm.

Such threats endanger a person’s health and generate the need for a group of mechanisms that help them care for their well-being by avoiding these negative influences.

We call this group of mechanisms “Healthiness.”

(Associated need served by the group of mechanisms called “Healthiness” – 7. The need to protect ourselves from infections and toxic/unhealthy influences.)

Just as a person has the need to identify harmful influences while exploring and understanding the world, they also have the need to recognize phenomena that are beneficial and favorable for them and their needs.

To this end, nature and society have equipped humans with a group of mechanisms that, upon encountering a phenomenon, signal to them that it is beneficial for their needs.

We call this group of mechanisms “Pleasure.”

(Associated need served by the group of mechanisms called “Pleasure” – 8. The need to identify what is beneficial.)

In the context of the need to recognize what is beneficial, an important clarification must be made:

Industrialization and human intervention in creating goods, services, and experiences designed to be desirable, engaging, and sought after by consumers have led to the emergence of artificially induced pleasurable experiences. These experiences, while truly enjoyable, often have a negative impact on a person’s physical and mental well-being, and overall life.

Specifically, this refers to phenomena such as:

• Excessive food processing and the treatment of plants and animals with chemicals and stimulants to enhance flavor.
• Efforts by industries to promote the consumption of alcohol, cigarettes, drugs, sugar, gambling, pornography, and many other products that activate the brain’s centers responsible for positive experiences.

Unlike natural phenomena that bring about similar positive feelings, these artificial sources lead to negative consequences, such as:

• Health issues – both mental and physical, weight problems, poor physical appearance.
• Damaged social relationships and disruptions in a person’s overall normal functioning.

For this reason, the pursuit of pleasure is the only function of human nature that has become problematic in modern times and potentially carries more risks than satisfaction.

In practice, relying solely on our natural instincts (i.e., following emotional impulses to seek pleasure and enjoyment) is more likely to result in mistakes for one’s life.

Following this clarification, we return to the core concept:

The human ability to identify what is beneficial through the pleasurable sensations it generates, leads to another interesting phenomenon: humans gain the capacity to anticipate which potential interactions will improve their ability to meet their needs and, consequently, provide pleasure and positive experiences.

To fully utilize this capacity, nature and society have equipped humans with a group of mechanisms that enable them to purposefully pursue a specific phenomenon that “promises pleasure/benefit” and is likely to bring positive experiences in the future.

This effectively allows humans to set meaningful goals for the future. Through these goals, they can eventually obtain what they desire and, in doing so, enhance their ability to meet their needs.

We call this group of mechanisms “Ambition.”

(Associated need served by the group of mechanisms called “Ambition” – 9. The need to move toward beneficial outcomes in the future.)

As mentioned at the beginning of the theory, the resources available within any given territory are often finite and frequently insufficient to be equally distributed among all individuals.

When we talk about resources, we include not only the obvious elements such as food, water, space, and shelter, but also less tangible ones like attention from others, the efforts of others in supporting our needs, access to potential intimate partners, information, and, in today’s world, financial resources, tools, and opportunities for self-realization.

This creates conditions for constant competition over these resources.

Among social species (those that function in groups, like humans), competition occurs on two levels:

• Inter-group competition (when one group competes with another).
• Intra-group competition (when individuals within the same group compete with each other).

While different mechanisms address inter-group competition, here’s how intra-group competition operates:

Due to the frequent scarcity of resources, within a group, some individuals may have access to resources, while others may not.

To determine who receives resources as a priority and who only if something remains, there exists a concept called “Social Hierarchy.”

Social hierarchy refers to the positioning of some individuals above others (in the subjective perceptions of the group, based on various traits or parameters).

This hierarchy is subjective for two reasons:

1. Different groups may value different traits when determining hierarchy.
2. Different individuals within a group may perceive hierarchy differently.

The higher a person is positioned in the social hierarchy, the greater the social status they are granted “in the eyes” of other group members. As a result, they gain prioritized access to more resources and benefits compared to others of lower social status.

To enable individuals to achieve higher positioning in the social hierarchy, nature and society have equipped humans with a group of mechanisms.

These mechanisms allow a person to improve their social standing, thereby gaining access to more resources and privileges to support the fulfillment of their needs.

We call this group of mechanisms “Status.”

(Associated need served by the group of mechanisms called “Status” – 10. The need for attention and social status)

With this, our discussion of the 18 universal human needs comes to an end.

Meaningful concluding words on the topic:

For humans, the way primary and secondary needs are “experienced” is very similar. In other words, a person does not feel these two types of needs differently.

Moreover, the failure to satisfy either type of need has long-lasting negative consequences for both the physical and mental health of an individual.

For this reason, we assert that if a person consistently neglects their needs, they will eventually become unable to function normally, leading to a deterioration of their health, social abilities, and overall quality of life.

This understanding brings us to the idea of…

 

7.

Supreme Human Selfishness and Personal Needs as the Core Driving Force Behind All Human Actions

After examining the complete set of human needs, we can summarize that the described 18 needs are the driving force behind everything in a person’s life.

In other words, everything a person does, thinks, chooses, and says in their life is a result of one or more of these needs.

This is the root of the belief that human beings are inherently selfish and that all people act to satisfy their own needs.

Even when people think and act in the interest of others, the ultimate goal is still to fulfill one or more of their own needs.

This is no coincidence. As we’ve clarified, failing to meet these needs would mean we cease to exist as a biological species.

This understanding is crucial for another reason — it helps us grasp why prioritizing our own needs is essential.

The answer lies in the fact that we cannot take care of others effectively unless we first take care of ourselves!

Does this sound counterintuitive? Consider the following thought experiment:

Imagine you’re in a crashed airplane. Everything is on fire.

Inside are you, a mother with a small child, and an elderly person.

Everyone except you is trapped and unable to move.

There’s only one wet blanket available, which you could use to protect someone.

Who should you use the blanket for?

The correct answer is – yourself.

This isn’t selfishness. It’s strategic.

The others in the scenario will have a better chance of survival if you use the blanket to save yourself and seek help.

If, however, you use the blanket to save someone else, everyone will lose—you included. Remember, they’re all trapped!

Although this is a hypothetical scenario, it’s easy to find real-life parallels:

1. A mother cannot fully care for her child unless her own needs are met (to at least some extent).
• Otherwise, she becomes irritable, explosive, neglectful, and inconsiderate.
• She focuses on the wrong things and misses important details in her child’s care.
2. A husband cannot care for his wife unless his own needs are met (to at least some extent).
• Otherwise, like in the previous example, he will feel, think, and act against her instead of for her.
3. A leader in an organization cannot address the needs of the organization if their own needs are not met (to at least some extent).
• Otherwise, they will seek to maximize personal gain, which will lead to the neglect of organizational processes, ultimately lowering the organization’s effectiveness.

This highlights the widespread misunderstanding in modern society of the importance of healthy selfishness.

Let’s clarify what healthy selfishness means:

• Selfishness should never come “at the expense” of others.
• In other words, people should always prioritize their own needs, BUT without hindering others from doing the same or violating the needs of others.

But why are people different? Why are some people more overtly selfish than others?

This brings us to the idea of the similarities and differences between people…

 

8.

Similarities and Differences Among People

As discussed earlier in the context of genetics, the commonality among all humans lies in the fact that every person possesses all the mechanisms mentioned (which serve to fulfill their needs).

This is why these mechanisms are often referred to as universal characteristics of human nature.

The differences among people, on the other hand, stem from the degree and intensity with which each of these characteristics manifests in an individual.

We can think of this “manifestation” as a scale ranging from 1% to 100%.

• The closer a person’s result is to 1%, the weaker the particular characteristic is expressed in them.
• Conversely, the closer it is to 100%, the stronger the characteristic is expressed.

As previously clarified, these characteristics are socio-functional mechanisms that people use to meet their needs.

• The higher the scores for all mechanisms associated with a specific need, the more capable a person is of fulfilling that need.
• Consequently, they will dedicate more time, attention, energy, and resources to satisfying it.

Why is this important to us?

Because:

• The more time, attention, energy, and resources a person spends on meeting a particular need, the less they have left for other needs.
• At a certain point, this makes them “good” at fulfilling some needs at the expense of others.
• In other words, they develop “strengths” in certain areas and “weaknesses” in others.

An important understanding of “strengths” and “weaknesses” is that they are not inherently such.

They only become strengths or weaknesses in specific contexts.

This leads us to several important points that we need to address…

 

9.

The Relationship Between Strengths, Weaknesses, Human Potential, the Mystery Called “Talent,” and the Concept of Life Alignment

 

As it became clear from the description of the characteristics of human nature and the understanding of their manifestation “on a scale” from 0% to 100%, each person has a different capacity to satisfy their individual needs.

The higher the results for a particular group of mechanisms (pertaining to a specific need), the more capable the person is of satisfying that need.

When we talk about strengths and weaknesses, potential, and talents, we usually place the topic in a specific context.

In general, a person is “strong” or “weak” in a particular activity.
They have potential for something specific.
And they can develop their talent for that specific thing.

This means that we judge people’s strengths and weaknesses, their potential, and talents in the context of their ability to exhibit specific behaviors that lead to overcoming certain challenges.

But as we already know from the theory so far, the ways in which people act to overcome challenges are entirely influenced by the characteristics of their human nature.
In other words, strengths and weaknesses, as well as potential and talents, are actually combinations of their characteristics, which combinations make them successful in taking the right actions in the context of specific challenges.

To distinguish strengths from potential and from talent, the following clarification should be made:

A combination of strengths—various strongly expressed characteristics—represents potential for success in a given activity.
For this potential to transform into talent, it is necessary for this potential (these strengths) to be used as a priority (instead of other characteristics), as well as to be developed over time.
This development is possible only if the activity that this potential serves receives the person’s priority attention, time, and resources, which, with the necessary dose of persistence, leads to a change in their human nature.

To avoid being abstract, let’s give an example:
If a person has strongly expressed characteristics from the group of intellectual mechanisms (i.e., most of their intellectual mechanisms for overcoming challenges score above average), this gives them potential for good success in science, for example.

This is because intellectual abilities help a person deal with the challenges that different sciences pose. That is why these intellectual abilities are considered strengths in the context of the scientific field.
However, for this potential to become a talent, the person must spend a lot of time, devote a lot of attention, and allocate their resources, prioritizing engagement with science over other things, consistently over time.
In other words, they must practice, thereby developing their potential into talent.

Let’s offer another example:
One of the mechanisms in the “Ambition” group (for satisfying the need to move toward what is beneficial in the future) is called “Energy.” The characteristic “Energy” describes a person’s inclination to be active, dynamic, and to think, act, and generally function “at a higher tempo” compared to other people. High results on this scale would be useful for someone engaged in sports, for example.
Such results should be seen as potential for high athletic achievements.
For this potential to turn into talent, however, the person must engage in sports for many years and enrich this potential with real, applicable competencies.

On the other hand, the same high results on this scale would not be as significant for someone working as a watchmaker, for instance. (Not to mention that they could even be a hindrance. In other words, this trait could be considered a weakness in the context of the specific activity “watchmaking.”)

This understanding of strengths and weaknesses, potential, and talent is extremely important from the perspective of the practical applicability of the knowledge included in this theory.
It helps us understand why it is important for people to seek ways to participate in life circumstances (work, hobbies, relationships, etc.) that are in harmony with their strengths and potential so that they can turn into talent.

In other words, not just to do random things in their life, but to choose activities, professions, hobbies, friends, and partners in a way that achieves the best possible results and successes in every area of life.
This phenomenon is called “life alignment” and represents placing a person in circumstances that are supported by the characteristics of their human nature.

In other words, placing the right people in the right (according to their profiles) activities, work, social contacts, partners, and hobbies.

This also means not placing a person in certain circumstances and then trying to change them to develop the necessary characteristics, but choosing the right people for the right circumstances so that these people already have the strengths (potential) and want to further develop it (values), which automatically leads to the manifestation of talent.

This brings us to two logical questions:

How can a person objectively assess their potentials?

Where should they attempt to develop their talents?

The answers to these questions lie in the results of the individual for each of the separate characteristics (how strong the manifestations of the individual mechanisms are specifically for them) and, accordingly, in what they would be best at according to their profile.

(This information can be “illuminated” through individual psychological profiling. More about this, you can learn here.)

Alright, you might say, but understanding all this, it seems as if a person has been “dealt certain cards” in life…

This raises the meaningful question:

 

10.
Can a Person Change, and How?

An important topic we need to address is whether all these characteristics we’ve discussed and which we can “measure” through psychological profiling are permanent over time, or if a person can develop and change.

The answer is not straightforward.

Although human nature is enduring and difficult to alter, there are scenarios where it can change over time. Here they are:

• If a person experiences a serious trauma (e.g., a severe accident or physical injury) capable of permanently changing the body’s internal biochemistry and/or their way of life.
• If a person drastically changes the environment in which they live. For example, moving from a secluded life on a livestock farm in sunny Africa to a large, cold northern city in Finland, where their daily life involves sales and constant interactions with many people.
• If, for one reason or another, biochemical and/or genetic processes or diseases are triggered in the person’s body that significantly alter the neuro-biochemical structure of their body.
• If a person undergoes psychotherapy or another intensive process of working with professionals in the context of their personality.
• If a person (for one reason or another) is persistently unable or restricted from satisfying any of the previously described needs for long periods of time.

To summarize, it’s important to understand that change in human nature is possible, but it is difficult, slow, and often not very drastic.

This gives us an answer to why an important step in a person’s life is to seek alignment between their human nature and the demands of the environment.

However, despite all this, there is no such thing as a 100% ideal environment and circumstances…

In other words, no matter how good we are at choosing what to engage in, at some point we inevitably face the earlier-described need to develop and change if we want to improve our ability to deal with challenges.

This realization is further supported by another phenomenon—the influence our behaviors have on others.

As we mentioned earlier, the 18 needs are satisfied through their corresponding groups of mechanisms.

In practice, these groups of mechanisms lead to characteristic behaviors (actions) through which a person satisfies their needs.

Extreme manifestations (extremely high or extremely low) of the characteristics of human nature lead to extreme behaviors.

These extreme behaviors, in turn, have extreme impacts on other people, thereby disrupting their need for balance in life.

This creates negative emotional experiences in them, which in turn leads to the formation of negative impressions of us.

Why is this important and why should we care, you might ask…

This brings us to the moment where we need to clarify the concepts of “Identity,” “Reputation,” and the significance of their divergence in a person’s life…

 

11.
Why Should a Person Change?
The Concepts of Identity and Reputation and Their Importance in a Person’s Life

The way we view ourselves and, accordingly, describe ourselves (Identity) is different from how others view us and, accordingly, describe us (Reputation).

From the perspective of our success in the modern social world, identity matters very little, unlike reputation.

This is because everything significant in our lives happens either during interaction with other people, in preparation for such interaction, or after such interaction, when we encounter the consequences of it.

Each time we interact with someone, our metaphorical “cup” of reputation either “fills up” a little or “empties out” a little.

Subsequently, based on how “full” or “empty” it is, other people decide whether to trust us, whether to interact with us, and how.

The emptier it is, the less trust, time, and attention others are likely to give us. This leads to direct losses for us and to fewer opportunities for success in life.

Indirectly, however, people also make decisions based on their impressions of us (when they are not interacting directly with us). 

For example, when they talk about us to third parties and thus form impressions of us in them, even though they have never met us.

This again has consequences for our life and our chances for success, as these third parties will then decide whether to interact with us and trust us or not, based on the information passed on by others.

Thus, the takeaway is that the ways in which we behave largely determine our chances for success or failure in most areas of our lives.

And as we clarified, how we behave is largely predetermined by our human nature.
For this reason, understanding our own human nature and how it influences our reputation is crucial to our success!

Okay, but how do we understand which behaviors are “extreme”?
It is important to understand that people form their opinion of us and our traits in two ways:

• By comparing us to themselves and their own “ways”;
• By comparing us to other people similar to us (similar in age, gender, race, and nationality/culture).

Based on these two comparisons, we either fit into the “norm” (what they perceive as normal), or we don’t.

Thus, the understanding we have gained so far about the socio-functional essence of human nature provides us with information about what drives us to do the things we do and how what we do leads to success or failure in life.

12.
Ultimate Personal Responsibility and Luck as a Factor

In practice, summing up the influence of all the constructs and mechanisms mentioned earlier, we can assert that they are responsible for over 95% of everything we do, think, choose, say, and believe.

This is an extremely important realization, as it helps us understand that every outcome in our life, everything that happens to us (or at least 95% of it), is actually due to ourselves.

This leads to the understanding that everything in our life is our responsibility.

To verify this thesis, we can attempt to analyze our past experience, which will lead us to the conclusion that there is no event in our life that cannot be traced back to something we said, did, decided, or thought (or, conversely, did not say, do, decide, or think).
This practically means that, in the end, our human nature is the direct cause of everything in our life!

To address the obvious question – “And where do the other 5% go?” – the Socio-Functional Theory considers the concept of “Luck” in the context of the already described characteristics of a person:

Luck refers to those events, circumstances, and phenomena that happened in a person’s life for which there was objectively no information that they could have received (through their senses), understood (through their intellect), and used in advance to influence the events (through decisions, actions, and words).

It’s important to clarify that if such information existed, but the person, for one reason or another, did not capture, process, and use it, then we no longer talk about luck but about the inability to cope (due to weak manifestations of one or more of their characteristics), which automatically makes it a personal responsibility again.

As for the other cases where such information was genuinely unavailable, then we can talk about chance.

However, chance is dealt with by a whole other science that tells us we can actually analyze potential chances in the context of a given phenomenon to identify what is called statistical probability.

By identifying statistical probability, we can make an informed choice in advance about whether and to what extent to dedicate our time, attention, and efforts to that phenomenon.

This practically means that even when we talk about pure luck, we still arrive at our ability (or inability) – the ability to predict and analyze information, whether we are talking about taking risks or pursuing opportunities (since luck can be both positive and negative).

This should help us realize that, from the perspective of our ability to meet our needs, it would be irrational to spend our time, attention, and resources blindly pursuing the potential for something to happen (i.e., to be lucky/to succeed) without the statistical probability that it will happen.

To clarify, a statistically rational choice would be one that “bets” on a choice with at least a 51% chance of success.

If, despite reason (rationality), we choose to do things differently, then this automatically neglects one of our needs (we choose not to use our intellectual mechanisms) – in other words, we are working against ourselves and our own need to understand the world.

With this, Socio-Functional Theory exhausts the cause-and-effect relationships for everything in a person’s life.

The idea that everything in our life is a consequence of human nature (ours and that of others) easily leads us to the conclusion that if a person wants to be successful, happy, and fulfilled in the modern social world, then understanding (and using this understanding) of human nature is “simply” the most important skill that a person should master!

13.
Applications in Everyday Life – The Main Life Spheres

From here on, the question arises: “What should we do with this knowledge?”

Since knowledge only makes sense and is useful in the context of its applicability in the real world, as a conclusion, we will focus on the five areas that are most significant for us as humans and for the quality of our life.

We say that these areas of life are the most important because they often occupy the largest portion of our time, effort, resources, and consciousness.

Additionally, the things we do in these five areas of our life largely determine its quality.

Effort applied to improving any one of the five areas has a lasting, comprehensive, positive impact on each of the other four, thereby each contributing to our overall happiness, satisfaction, and meaning in life.

The Socio-Functional Theory of Human Nature describes the five most important areas of human life as follows:

• Relationships, Intimacy, and Love
• Parenthood and Upbringing
• Health (Physical and Mental)
• Career (Work, Business, and Leadership)
• Social Contacts and Leisure

And since the reason for creating this theory and our primary mission is to help people live a happy, meaningful, and fulfilling life, we offer just that – to help you master the ability to apply this knowledge in the five main areas of life, with the aim of improving each one of them.

Learn more about the applicability of the Socio-Functional Theory and the problems it solves from our exclusive partners in PeopleFixer.com – here.

If you wish to learn more about your human nature and its manifestations in any of the five described areas, we offer the process of in-depth psychological profiling, which aims to illuminate the characteristics of your human nature described in the theory and the ways in which these characteristics affect your life.