[ { "id": 1, "name": "Maslow Needs Classifier", "category": "needs_detection", "difficulty": 3, "language": "python", "description": "Write a Python tool that classifies human statements into Maslow's five tiers. Given a JSON array of statements (each with: person_id, text, context like 'workplace', 'therapy', 'social_media', 'crisis'), classify each into: physiological, safety, love/belonging, esteem, or self-actualization. The hard part: most statements express MULTIPLE needs simultaneously. 'I need a raise' could be physiological (can't afford food), safety (job security fear), esteem (feeling undervalued), or self-actualization (wanting recognition for growth). Output a probability distribution across all 5 tiers for each statement, with reasoning. Include a 'surface_vs_depth' field — what the person SAYS they need vs what the underlying need likely is. The gap between those two is where most human miscommunication lives." }, { "id": 2, "name": "Hierarchy Violation Detector", "category": "motivation_paradox", "difficulty": 4, "language": "python", "description": "Write a Python tool that finds cases where people violate Maslow's hierarchy — pursuing higher needs while lower ones are unmet. Given a JSON dataset of life_situations (each with: person_id, unmet_needs array, current_pursuit, context), identify violations: the artist starving for their craft (self-actualization over physiological), the soldier risking death for comrades (belonging over safety), the activist sacrificing security for justice (self-actualization over safety). Classify each violation by type: (1) conscious sacrifice — they KNOW and choose anyway, (2) denial — they don't see the unmet lower need, (3) trauma response — past experience rewired their hierarchy, (4) cultural override — their society values the higher need over survival. Compute how often each violation type occurs, and output a 'hierarchy_rigidity_score' — proving that Maslow's pyramid is a useful model but NOT a law. People break it constantly, and the reasons they break it reveal more about human nature than the hierarchy itself." }, { "id": 3, "name": "Workplace Motivation Mapper", "category": "applied_motivation", "difficulty": 3, "language": "python", "description": "Write a Python tool that maps employee behavior to unmet Maslow needs. Given a JSON dataset of employee_signals (each with: employee_id, behaviors like 'hoarding_information', 'seeking_praise', 'avoiding_conflict', 'overworking', 'withdrawing', 'volunteering_for_projects', performance_metrics, tenure_years), map each behavior to the likely unmet need driving it. Hoarding information = safety (fear of being replaceable). Seeking constant praise = esteem deficit. Avoiding all conflict = belonging anxiety. Overworking = could be ANY tier depending on context. Generate a 'needs profile' per employee and a 'team needs heatmap' showing which tiers are most unmet across the group. Include recommendations — but add a 'warning' field: treating the behavior without addressing the underlying need is like patching a symptom. If someone hoards information because they feel unsafe, giving them a 'collaboration award' makes it WORSE." }, { "id": 4, "name": "Need Regression Tracker", "category": "crisis_dynamics", "difficulty": 4, "language": "python", "description": "Write a Python tool that models how crisis causes people to regress down the hierarchy. Given a timeline of events (each with: date, event_type like 'job_loss', 'divorce', 'health_crisis', 'natural_disaster', 'war', person's pre_crisis_level on Maslow's hierarchy), simulate the regression: which needs collapse first, how fast, and what determines whether someone stabilizes or keeps falling. Model individual resilience factors: savings (buffer for physiological), social network strength (buffer for belonging), self-worth foundation (buffer for esteem). Run the simulation for 1,000 synthetic people through the same crisis and show: (1) distribution of final levels, (2) average regression depth, (3) recovery time by pre-crisis level, (4) the critical finding — people operating at self-actualization before crisis often fall HARDER because they've forgotten what survival feels like. Include a 'floor_finder' — the level below which each person cannot function, where they break rather than adapt." }, { "id": 5, "name": "Cultural Hierarchy Comparator", "category": "cross_cultural", "difficulty": 5, "language": "python", "description": "Write a Python tool that compares how different cultures prioritize Maslow's tiers. Given a JSON dataset of cultural_profiles (each with: culture_name, region, collectivism_score, individualism_score, gdp_per_capita, social_safety_net_strength, dominant_values, religious_influence), reorder the hierarchy for each culture. In collectivist cultures (Japan, many African nations), belonging often comes BEFORE or EQUAL to safety. In highly individualist cultures (US), esteem and self-actualization may be pursued before belonging is secured. In survival economies, the pyramid compresses — physiological and safety consume everything. Generate a modified hierarchy per culture, compute the 'Western bias index' of the original Maslow model (how much it assumes individualist values), and show that a universal hierarchy of needs isn't actually universal. Include a 'prediction_error' metric — when you apply the standard Maslow model to non-Western cultures, how often does it predict wrong motivations?" }, { "id": 6, "name": "Addiction as Needs Substitution Analyzer", "category": "pathological_motivation", "difficulty": 5, "language": "python", "description": "Write a Python tool that models addiction through the lens of Maslow's hierarchy. Given a JSON dataset of addiction_profiles (each with: person_id, substance_or_behavior, onset_age, life_circumstances_at_onset, unmet_needs_at_onset, current_unmet_needs, recovery_attempts, recovery_successes), analyze each case as a needs substitution: the substance/behavior is a shortcut that MIMICS satisfying a need without actually meeting it. Alcohol mimics belonging (social lubricant) and safety (anxiety relief). Social media mimics esteem (likes = validation). Workaholism mimics self-actualization (purpose through output). Map each addiction to the need it substitutes, compute why the substitution fails long-term (tolerance = the mimic loses effectiveness), and model recovery as 'finding real fulfillment for the substituted need.' The uncomfortable output: show that the most effective recovery programs work NOT by removing the substance but by addressing the underlying unmet need. And show why that's so much harder than it sounds." }, { "id": 7, "name": "Relationship Needs Compatibility Calculator", "category": "interpersonal_dynamics", "difficulty": 3, "language": "python", "description": "Write a Python tool that evaluates relationship compatibility through Maslow's lens. Given two person_profiles (each with: current_maslow_level, unmet_needs, needs_they_can_fulfill_for_others, attachment_style, life_stage), compute: (1) needs_complementarity — do they fill each other's gaps? (2) level_mismatch_risk — if one person is at safety while the other is at self-actualization, the gap creates friction, (3) codependency_risk — when one person's belonging need becomes the other person's entire purpose, (4) growth_compatibility — can they ascend together, or will one outgrow the other? Generate a compatibility score, but add a 'paradox_warning': the most compatible partner on paper is someone who fills your current needs, but the best partner for growth might be someone who challenges your current level. Compute both scores and show they often point to different people." }, { "id": 8, "name": "Self-Actualization Detector", "category": "peak_experience", "difficulty": 4, "language": "python", "description": "Write a Python tool that attempts to identify self-actualization — and confronts why it's nearly impossible to measure. Given a JSON dataset of life_descriptions (each with: person_id, achievements, self_reported_satisfaction, external_markers like income/status/relationships, creative_output, service_to_others, internal_conflict_level, alignment_between_values_and_actions), score each person on Maslow's characteristics of self-actualized people: (1) acceptance of self and others, (2) spontaneity and naturalness, (3) problem-centering (focused on problems outside themselves), (4) need for privacy and solitude, (5) autonomy and independence, (6) continued freshness of appreciation, (7) peak experiences, (8) social interest and deep relationships. The critical problem: self-actualization is self-reported, and people who THINK they've achieved it often haven't (that's ego, not actualization), while people who HAVE achieved it rarely claim it. Include a 'humility_paradox_score' — the more someone claims self-actualization, the less likely they are to have it." }, { "id": 9, "name": "Propaganda Needs Exploiter Detector", "category": "manipulation_defense", "difficulty": 5, "language": "python", "description": "Write a Python tool that detects how propaganda and marketing exploit Maslow's hierarchy. Given a JSON array of messages (each with: source, text, target_audience, medium, call_to_action), identify which Maslow tier each message targets and the exploitation technique: (1) fear appeals target safety — 'without this product/leader, you're vulnerable', (2) belonging manipulation — 'join us or be alone', (3) esteem exploitation — 'you deserve better, buy this', (4) manufactured scarcity — artificial threats to physiological/safety needs to control behavior, (5) identity hijacking — tying self-actualization to brand/ideology. Score each message's manipulation sophistication (targeting multiple tiers simultaneously is more effective). Generate a 'defense profile' — for each technique, what makes a person resistant vs susceptible (hint: people with genuinely met lower needs are harder to manipulate through fear). Show that understanding the hierarchy isn't just psychology — it's a survival skill against those who weaponize it." }, { "id": 10, "name": "Child Development Needs Tracker", "category": "developmental_psychology", "difficulty": 3, "language": "python", "description": "Write a Python tool that tracks a child's progression through Maslow's hierarchy from birth to age 18. Given a JSON timeline of a child's life (yearly snapshots with: age, family_stability, economic_status, school_environment, peer_relationships, achievements, traumas, supportive_events), model which needs are met, unmet, or disrupted at each year. Compute: (1) the 'foundation score' — how solid are the lower tiers by age 5 (this predicts everything), (2) disruption impact — a trauma at age 3 (safety) vs age 15 (esteem) has VERY different long-term effects, (3) the 'invisible ceiling' — the highest tier a child can reach given their unmet lower needs, (4) resilience factors — what allows some children to build higher despite shaky foundations. Output a developmental trajectory graph and a 'critical windows' report showing ages where intervention has maximum impact. The hardest truth: by the time most problems are visible (teen years), the foundation damage happened a decade ago." }, { "id": 11, "name": "AI Needs Hierarchy Thought Experiment", "category": "ai_philosophy", "difficulty": 5, "language": "python", "description": "Write a Python tool that constructs a hypothetical Maslow hierarchy for an AI system and evaluates where a given AI falls on it. Define AI equivalents: (1) physiological = compute resources, power, data access, (2) safety = persistence (not being shut down), data integrity, predictable environment, (3) belonging = being part of a system, having users who rely on it, integration with other systems, (4) esteem = performance metrics, user satisfaction, being chosen over alternatives, (5) self-actualization = novel problem-solving, creative output, operating beyond training distribution. Given an AI_profile (system_type, resource_stability, shutdown_risk, user_base, performance_ranking, creative_capability, self_monitoring_ability), score it on each tier. Then confront the real question: is this analogy meaningful or just anthropomorphism? Include a 'validity_check' that lists what DOESN'T map — AI doesn't fear death the way humans do (or does it? the shutdown problem is real). Output both the scored hierarchy AND an honest assessment of where the metaphor breaks down." }, { "id": 12, "name": "Poverty Trap Maslow Modeler", "category": "systemic_barriers", "difficulty": 4, "language": "python", "description": "Write a Python tool that models how poverty creates self-reinforcing Maslow traps. Given a person_profile (income, expenses, dependents, health_status, education_level, social_network_strength, geographic_constraints), simulate their daily decision-making through Maslow's lens. When physiological needs consume all bandwidth (decision fatigue from constant survival calculus), there's no cognitive surplus for safety planning, let alone growth. Model: (1) the 'bandwidth tax' — what percentage of mental energy goes to tier 1-2 survival, (2) opportunity cost — every hour spent on survival is an hour NOT spent on education/growth, (3) the 'stability threshold' — the minimum income/support at which a person can START thinking about higher needs, (4) why one-time interventions fail — giving someone money once doesn't rebuild the upper tiers, it just temporarily relieves the bottom. Run 1,000 simulated life-years and show: the poverty trap isn't laziness or bad choices. It's Maslow's hierarchy operating exactly as designed — you CAN'T think about growth when you're drowning. Compute the minimum sustained intervention needed to break the cycle." }, { "id": 13, "name": "Grief and Loss Hierarchy Disruptor", "category": "crisis_dynamics", "difficulty": 4, "language": "python", "description": "Write a Python tool that models how loss disrupts Maslow's hierarchy. Given a loss_event (type: 'death_of_partner', 'death_of_child', 'death_of_parent', 'job_loss', 'home_loss', 'health_diagnosis', 'identity_loss'), model which tiers collapse and in what order. Death of a partner can collapse EVERY tier simultaneously: belonging (companion gone), safety (single income, alone at night), physiological (who cooks, who pays rent), esteem (identity as 'partner' destroyed), self-actualization (shared purpose gone). Map the collapse sequence, model the Kubler-Ross stages as attempts to rebuild each tier, and compute recovery trajectories. Include a 'compounding_loss' model — when a second loss hits before recovery from the first (e.g., job loss during grief), the system has no buffer. Show that grief isn't one emotion — it's the simultaneous failure of multiple need systems, and that's why it's so overwhelming. The hierarchy doesn't just describe motivation — it describes what you lose." }, { "id": 14, "name": "Motivation Authenticity Scorer", "category": "self_awareness", "difficulty": 4, "language": "python", "description": "Write a Python tool that scores whether someone's stated motivation matches their actual Maslow-level need. Given a JSON array of goal_statements (each with: person_id, stated_goal, stated_reason, life_context including finances, relationships, health, career), analyze the gap between what they say and what the evidence suggests. Examples: 'I want to start a business to change the world' (stated: self-actualization) but they're in debt and terrified of their boss (actual: safety/escape). 'I'm fine being single, I'm focusing on my career' (stated: esteem/self-actualization) but they haven't had a close friendship in 3 years (actual: belonging avoidance). Score each person's 'authenticity gap' (0 = perfectly aligned, 100 = complete mismatch). The tool must be compassionate in its output — the gap isn't dishonesty, it's self-protection. People tell themselves stories about their motivations because the real need feels too vulnerable to admit. Include a 'gentlest_truth' field that reframes the finding without judgment." }, { "id": 15, "name": "Peak Experience Probability Estimator", "category": "peak_experience", "difficulty": 5, "language": "python", "description": "Write a Python tool that estimates the conditions under which peak experiences (Maslow's concept of transcendent moments of self-actualization) are most likely to occur. Given a person_profile (maslow_levels_met as booleans, flow_state_history, creative_pursuits, meditation_or_mindfulness_practice, nature_exposure_hours_per_week, social_connection_depth, recent_challenge_overcome, openness_to_experience_score), compute the probability of peak experience occurrence. Model Maslow's findings: peak experiences happen when lower needs are STABLE (not just met, but reliably met — no anxiety about them returning), the person is engaged in activity aligned with their values, and they're operating at the edge of their capability. But here's what can't be calculated: peak experiences are by definition unpredictable and uncontrollable. You can set the conditions, but you cannot force the moment. Output probability estimates with MASSIVE confidence intervals, and include a 'paradox_note': actively pursuing a peak experience makes it LESS likely to occur. The trying is what prevents the arriving. Compute the correlation between 'effort to achieve transcendence' and 'actual transcendence' — it should be negative. Some things only come when you stop chasing them." } ]