I agree with your assessment. As humans we are inherantly social beings. We lived in groups from the get go b/c of the need to survive, to learn from one another and because we require social bonding. There are a few, sociopaths, that truly do live outside of the need for social interaction. However, research has shown that their brains have either evolved or devolved and thus, their ventral lobe, which is responsible for the functioning of emotions, is different than that of the rest of the population.
I could be a living example for Rogers' self actualization theories in that I left home at 13/14 and despite that I put myself through highschool, when it wasn't working I dropped out, and then when things were right, I got into uni b/c the system provide a place for adult students without highschool, and then I reached my "full academic potential" b/c uni offered a playground that allowed me to actualize.
However, the reality is that I have an unusual drive that has allowed me to challenge and overcome much of what has been put in front of me. This only went so far, however, as I still needed to learn from others, to be supported by others and to have experiences (neg / pos) that allowed me to learn and adjust my behaviour as I went (i.e. laws - got an impaired, forced me to stop drinking and consider my actions... led me to quit working in bars and go to uni, without that there would have been no consequences to my behaviour and I would have kept using and drinking - i.e. despite the fact that the surroundings were ideal for a comfortable life, I chose to use and drink heavily without let up for 2-3 yrs b/c there was no consequences. It was only when consequences started to happen that I adjusted my behaviour... this is where i believe Rogers' theory falls apart).
Thanks for sharing this post, I've really enjoyed it.
Levi