The author questions an assumption in A.N. Leontiev's theory of activity that the latter is induced not by the need as such but by the object with which this need has come to be associated. In particular the positions forwarded in S. P. Manoukian's article published in this magazine (1984, N 3) are disputed. Some logical and theoretical arguments which make inacceptable the above assumption are given. A conclusion is made that there are no convincing evidence which would justify substitution of the traditional psychological postulate that behavior (and intentional activity as well) is motivated by needs.