Psychology "Marx" the Spot

Soon enough you'll be your own psych wizard!

First of all, on page 393, Alberto talks about Marx's ideas about the value of work; that without work we feel an emptiness. He's absolutely right! According to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, employment of some sort is needed to feel self-actualization. It fits under the categories of self-perception and environmental approval. We seek for some sort of appraisal or recognition from our peers. One way to do that is to build up a repertoire within our occupation; establish something that we can hang our hats on. Having an occupation where you're valued and respected by your colleagues is crucial. Also, having something significant, such as a job with purpose, helps fulfill our need for self-esteem. This goes along with Erik Erikson's stages of development, more specifically the middle-age crisis of Generativity vs. Stagnation. In this stage of life, around the age of 35-60, people begin to question whether or not they have a purpose in life. It's this seek to be a part of something greater than ourselves that many middle-aged adults have midlife crises. In short, having a meaningful job helps fulfill approval from our environment and approval from ourselves. 

Secondly, on page 391, Alberto claims that the ruling class sets the norms. This is also true! As it was found in Asch's experiment in conformity, people tend to conform based off of social norms of those they perceive to be in a position of authority [refer to Milgram's study of obedience]. Thus, people like the political elites have more influence over public views on public policy, or why celebrities have influence over social trends and culture; they're in positions of authority. In the case that Marx refers to specifically, this has to do with what is called "Normative Social Influence". This is a type of conformity that occurs when someone submits to the majority opinion. It's a logical fallacy as it's a bandwagon tactic, but people do it nonetheless to prevent social conflict among their peers. "Why cause a dispute when you can just blend in?" This is not to be confused with "Informative Social Influence" where the person in the minority can't form an opinion on something, and thus believes that the majority must be right if they all concur. "If they all believe it's right, then there must be some validity in their thoughts, right?"

Here's a cool video explaining Asch's discovery, narrated by Dr. Phillip Zimbardo, the mastermind behind the Stanford Prison Experiment.
https://youtu.be/NyDDyT1lDhA