Quotessence
Home / Topics / Need Quotes

Need Quotes

Browse 880 quotes about Need.

Need Quotes

“Is there anything else you need my assistance with?' 'Need? No.' His head turned to the side. A lock of bronze hair fell against his cheek. 'Want? Yes. But that would be selfish of me. I prefer to be greedy.' 'Are they not the same thing?' 'Not in my opinion. Greedy is not necessarily a solitary act,' he replied.”

“He had known on some level, even if he couldn't articulate it clearly at the time, that the problem, the thing that kept him from being loved, was his tendency toward excess, the big hunger inside of him, the same force that had made him drink and drug that had mutated in sobriety to other things - mostly food and validation- and he stuffed the emptiness however he could. His need was bottomless.”

“If you are avoidant, the first step, therefore, is to acknowledge your need for space—whether emotional or physical—when things get too close, and then learn how to communicate that need. Explain to your partner in advance that you need some time alone when you feel things getting too mushy and that it’s not a problem with him or her but rather your own need in any relationship (this bit is important!). This should quell their worries and somewhat calm their attachment system. They are then less likely to intensify their efforts to draw closer to you.”

“Whether you attack or yield, you are reacting. You are off track, no longer focused on the prize—the protection of your core interests and needs. Yielding rewards the other’s abusive behavior, and counterattacking reinforces it. In either case, you interrupt the other’s process of accepting our No. The choice is yours. The moment you react to the other’s reaction, you are initiating an action-reaction cycle that can go on forever. The alternative is not to react but rather to stay true to your underlying Yes. Keep your focus on what matters to you.”

“I told him I would go up there; he said no, no, everything was fine. I drove up anyway and when I opened the door to the house he was sitting alone in the kitchen, the kettle on the stove madly whistling away. He was fast asleep; after the stroke he sometimes nodded off in the middle of things. I woke him, and when he saw me he patted my cheek. 'Good boy,' he muttered. I made him change his clothes and then fixed us a dinner of fried rice from some leftovers.”

“What’s important is, who needs to move where? Does the incrementalist need to move closer to the completionist’s view or vice versa? In either case, you’ve got to use the simplest trick in the conflict resolution book : finding common ground. A better way to think about this is, “What do these disparate philosophies need from each other?”

“Exchange converts a good into a commodity, an object no longer intended for the satisfaction of an individual need or brought into existence and vanishing with that need. On the contrary, it is intended for society, and its fate, now dependent on the laws which govern the social circulation of goods, can be far more capricious than that of Odysseus; for what is one-eyed Polyphemus compared with the argus-eyed customs officials of Newport, or the fair Circe compared with the German meat inspectors? It has become a commodity because its producers participate in a specific social relationship in which they have to confront each other as independent producers. Originally a natural, quite unproblematic thing, a good comes to express a social relation, acquires a social aspect. It is a product of labour, no longer merely a natural quality but a social phenomenon. We must therefore discover the law which governs this society as a producing and working community. Individual labour now appears in a new aspect, as part of the total labour force over which society disposes, and only from this point of view does it appear as value-creating labour.”

“Exchange is thus accessible to analysis because it not only satisfies individual needs, but is also a social necessity which makes individual need its instrument while at the same time limiting its satisfaction. For a need can be satisfied only to the extent that social necessity will permit. It is of course a presupposition, for human society is inconceivable without the satisfaction of individual needs. This does not mean, however, that exchange is simply a function of individual need, as indeed it would be in a collectivist economy, but that individual needs are satisfied only to the extent that exchange allows them to participate in the product of society. It is this participation which determines exchange. The latter appears to be simply a quantitative ratio between two things,[4] which is determined when this quantity is determined. The quantity which is turned over in exchange, however, counts only as a part of social production, which itself is quantitatively determined by the labour time that society assigns to it. Society is here conceived as an entity which employs its collective labour power to produce the total output, while the individual and his labour power count only as organs of that society. In that role, the individual shares in the product to the extent that his own labour power participates, on average, in the total labour power (assuming the intensity and productivity of labour to be fixed). If he works too slowly or if his work produces something useless (an otherwise useful article would be considered useless if it constituted an excess of goods in circulation), his labour power is scaled down to average labour time, i.e. socially necessary labour time. The aggregate labour time for the total product, once given, must therefore find expression in exchange. In its simplest form, this happens when the quantitative ratios between goods exchanged correspond to the quantitative ratios of the socially necessary labour time expended in their production. Commodities would in that case exchange at their values.”