Updated for 11-17-16: Man's Search for Meaning Lesson #2: Dialectical Method

Essay Options for Final Paper on Man's Search for Meaning:

Option One

In a 1,400-word essay, defend, support, or refute the argument that Man’s Search for Meaning gives us a cogent, appropriate and insightful analysis for evaluating Nikolai’s moral dissolution in the Chekhov short story “Gooseberries.”

Option Two:

In a 1,400-word essay, defend, support, or complicate the argument that the determinism evident in the 1999 Alexander Payne film Election is a compelling refutation of Frankl's notion that we are free to find meaning as a cure for our despair and self-destruction. Recommended Research Link for Alternative Option: http://sensesofcinema.com/2012/feature-articles/chance-and-choice-biology-and-theology-in-alexander-paynes-election/

Option Three

In a 1,400-word essay, defend, support, or complicate the argument that even though Frankl’s philosophy is informed by his religious faith, one need not be religious to embrace Frankl’s precepts and principles. You can concede that Frankl’s book is “religious” but not in the narrow sense of the word. Rather, it is universally religious. On the other hand, some will argue that the theistic religion that informs Frankl’s philosophy is too narrow to accommodate secular and atheist thinkers. Take a position and explain. You may want to consult Elizabeth Anderson’s “If God Is Dead, Is Everything Permitted?”

Option Four

In a 1,400-word essay, defend, support, or complicate the argument that Groundhog Day character Phil Connors’ spiritual malaise and eventual spiritual transformation can be analyzed through the lens of the principles in Viktor Frankl’s Man’s Search for Meaning.

Option Five:

Defend, refute, or complicate the argument that Man’s Search for Meaning is the greatest anti-self-help self-help book ever written.

Consider these distinguishing qualities of traditional self-help books:

1. They deny suffering as the central feature of human existence
2. They play into reader’s narcissistic fantasy of being special and at the center of the universe.
3. They promise easy solutions based on gimmicks intended to look like “insights.”
4. They promise easy solutions using common sense dressed up in jargon and pretentious language.
5. They tend to condescend to the reader, treating him like a child. There is an infantile, dumbed-down quality to them.
6. They make false promises about happiness and self-fulfillment.
7. They make being a selfish self-centered lout acceptable and “noble.”
8. They place selfish self-interest and self-indulgence over responsibility to oneself and others.

Option Six:

Develop a thesis that shows how Viktor Frankl's Man's Search for Meaning explains the major thematic points in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. You need 5 sources for your final paper.  

Option Seven:

Support, refute, or complicate the assertion that the Coen brothers' A Serious Man complements the themes in Viktor Frankl's Man's Search for Meaning.  See Slate and This Ruthless World. 

Option Eight:

Support, refute, or complicate the assertion that Being John Malkovich champions the doctrine of determinism, the notion that we do not have free will but are rather puppets to larger forces we cannot control (mania of celebrity, the cult of the personality, irrational enslavement of "love, to give three examples), and that the film's cogent determinism challenges Viktor Frankl's assertion in Man's Search for Meaning that we are free to choose a life of meaning rather than surrender to the existential vacuum. 

Sources:

What's It's Like to be John Malkovich

Applying Dualism to Being John Malkovich

Sample Outline

Paragraph 1: Summarize Frankl's thesis about our free will to choose meaning and the appropriate attitude toward life, suffering, and death. 

Paragraph 2: Summarize Being John Malkovich. 

Paragraph 3: Develop an argumentative thesis with four mapping components. 

Paragraphs 4-7: Write your supporting paragraphs.

Paragraph 8: Write a counterargument-rebuttal paragraph. 

Paragraph 9: Write your conclusion, a restatement of your thesis. 

Your guidelines for your Final Research Paper are as follows: 

This research paper should present a thesis that is specific, manageable, provable, and contestable—in other words, the thesis should offer a clear position, stand, or opinion that will be proven with research.   

You should analyze and prove your thesis using examples and quotes from a variety of sources.   

You need to research and cite from at least five sources.  You must use at least 3 different types of sources.     

At least one source must be from an ECC library database.    

At least one source must be a book, anthology or textbook.    

At least one source must be from a credible website, appropriate for academic use.  

The paper should not over-rely on one main source for most of the information. Rather, it should use multiple sources and synthesize the information found in them. 

This paper will be approximately 5-7 pages in length, not including the Works Cited page, which is also required.  This means at least 5 full pages of text.  The Works Cited page does NOT count towards length requirement.     

You must use MLA format for the document, in-text citations, and Works Cited page.   

You must integrate quotations and paraphrases using signal phrases and analysis or commentary.  

You must sustain your argument, use transitions effectively, and use correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation. 

Your paper must be logically organized and focused.  

Outline for Option One

Paragraph 1: Summarize the short story.

Paragraph 2: Summarize Frankl's book.

Paragraph 3: Develop your thesis.

Paragraphs 4-10: Supporting paragraphs

Paragraph 11: Restate thesis in dramatic form.

Second Option:

Defend, support, or complicate the argument that the determinism evident in the 1999 Alexander Payne film Election is a compelling refutation of Frankl's notion that we are free to find meaning as a cure for our despair and self-destruction. Recommended Research Link for Alternative Option: http://sensesofcinema.com/2012/feature-articles/chance-and-choice-biology-and-theology-in-alexander-paynes-election/

Sample Thesis That Shows How Election is a Refutation of Man's Search for Meaning

The characters in Alexander Payne's masterpiece Election (1999) refute Viktor Frankl's Man's Search for Meaning in compelling ways. For one, the characters lack the self-awareness to make the kind of choices or show the type of "freedom" that Frankl says we must utilize to find meaning. For two, the characters' earnest attempts to find meaning and structure in their lives prove to backfire and send them down a rabbit hole of moral dissolution and self-destruction suggesting that our most zealous efforts for meaning are contaminated by the unsavory impulses of the unconscious. For three, Tracy Flick's "meaning" and structure proves to be no meaning at all but rather unbridled ambition. Fourth, the movie's symbolism argues for a world governed by determinism through the environment and hard-wiring rather than a world populated by people who can make legitimate choices. Fifth, the movie's very title Election shows the ambiguity of choice: We "elect" to do things while at the same time life elects to place people in their place in the world's soulless machine. 

For paragraph 1, summarize Frankl's book.

For paragraph2, summarize the movie Election. 

For paragraph 3, write a thesis that presents your argument about meaning as you pit the book against the movie.

Paragraphs 4-10 should support your thesis.

Paragraph 11 will be your conclusion, a dramatic restatement of your thesis. 

Resource:

You may use the short story, "Critical Thinking," I wrote about the conversation I had with a student on this subject. 

Third Option

Defend, support, or complicate the argument that even though Frankl’s philosophy is informed by his religious faith, one need not be religious to embrace Frankl’s precepts and principles. You can concede that Frankl’s book is “religious” but not in the narrow sense of the word. Rather, it is universally religious. On the other hand, some will argue that the theistic religion that informs Frankl’s philosophy is too narrow to accommodate secular and atheist thinkers. Take a position and explain. You may want to consult Elizabeth Anderson’s “If God Is Dead, Is Everything Permitted?”

Sample Thesis of Student Who Opposes Frankl on Grounds That Frankl Is Religious

Frankl believes in God (he is a theist), and the philosophy that informs his book Man's Search for Meaning is based on Frankl's theism. Take away religious faith and all the precepts of Frankl's book come crashing down like a deck of cards. A close look at the book from an atheist's point of view reveals that the book is full of faith-based aphorisms and homilies that cannot be believed unless one is religious. The notion of meaning is false since no one can prove there is any meaning at all. We have adapted to cooperate with one another and have evolved morality, but these developments do not point to any meaning or any God. Frankl's heroism is not the result of his choice to have the right attitude toward his suffering but rather the result of his hard-wiring and environment. Lots of decent people would not have performed so heroically in Frankl's circumstances, and they should not be ashamed if they are more selfish when faced with such excruciating circumstances. My third point is that if everyone were like Viktor Frankl, a goody two shoes, the world would be a boring place. Many of our most famous comedians who preach cynicism, hopelessness, misanthropy, and life's essential meaninglessness, provide us with therapeutic laughter precisely because they have never found "meaning" or the pious attitude toward life that Frankl would impose on the rest of us. Finally, since the "meaning" of one person with one religious faith collides with the "meaning" of a person who practices a different religious faith, we can conclude that "meaning" is an illusion based on a person's delusion belief in God. Looking at the evidence, we are forced to conclude that Man's Search for Meaning is simply a mouthpiece for religious dogma and does nothing to convince me or anyone that "meaning" exists. 

Fourth Option

Defend, support, or complicate the argument that Groundhog Day character Phil Connors’ spiritual malaise and eventual spiritual transformation can be analyzed through the lens of the principles in Viktor Frankl’s Man’s Search for Meaning.

Thesis Sample:

Through the lens of Viktor Frankl's Man's Search for Meaning, Groundhog Day's universal themes of damnation and salvation become crystal clear. We see that Phil Connors is without meaning a damned man doomed to live in an eternal loop of nothingness and despair. We see that without hope for a meaningful existence, Connors surrenders to his beastly impulses of cynicism and petulant childishness, resulting in his disconnection from himself and the human race. We see that Connors must be redeemed by love, one of the three ways humans find meaning, according to Frankl. Finally, we see that it is only the primary drive for meaning that, like the logotherapy used by Viktor Frankl, can provide the therapy and healing Connors' shrunken soul needs. 

For paragraph 1, summarize Frankl's book.

For paragraph2, summarize the movie Groundhog Day. 

For paragraph 3, write a thesis that presents your argument about meaning as you pit the book against the movie.

Paragraphs 4-10 should support your thesis.

Paragraph 11 will be your conclusion, a dramatic restatement of your thesis. 

Fifth Option:

Defend, refute, or complicate the argument that Man’s Search for Meaning is the greatest anti-self-help self-help book ever written.

Consider these distinguishing qualities of traditional self-help books:

1. They deny suffering as the central feature of human existence
2. They play into reader’s narcissistic fantasy of being special and at the center of the universe.
3. They promise easy solutions based on gimmicks intended to look like “insights.”
4. They promise easy solutions using common sense dressed up in jargon and pretentious language.
5. They tend to condescend to the reader, treating him like a child. There is an infantile, dumbed-down quality to them.
6. They make false promises about happiness and self-fulfillment.
7. They make being a selfish self-centered lout acceptable and “noble.”
8. They place selfish self-interest and self-indulgence over responsibility to oneself and others.

Your guidelines for your Final Research Paper are as follows: 

This research paper should present a thesis that is specific, manageable, provable, and contestable—in other words, the thesis should offer a clear position, stand, or opinion that will be proven with research.   

You should analyze and prove your thesis using examples and quotes from a variety of sources.   

You need to research and cite from at least five sources.  You must use at least 3 different types of sources.     

At least one source must be from an ECC library database.    

At least one source must be a book, anthology or textbook.    

At least one source must be from a credible website, appropriate for academic use.  

The paper should not over-rely on one main source for most of the information. Rather, it should use multiple sources and synthesize the information found in them. 

This paper will be approximately 5-7 pages in length, not including the Works Cited page, which is also required.  This means at least 5 full pages of text.  The Works Cited page does NOT count towards length requirement.     

You must use MLA format for the document, in-text citations, and Works Cited page.   

You must integrate quotations and paraphrases using signal phrases and analysis or commentary.  

You must sustain your argument, use transitions effectively, and use correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation. 

Your paper must be logically organized and focused.   

One. What is the central purpose of Frankl’s book? (ix)

We must embrace Nietzsche’s adage: “He who has a Why to live for can bear almost any How.”

With a life purpose, we can march ahead in spite of our suffering and insurmountable obstacles.

In contrast, without a purpose, we will slog and languish through life and suffer emptiness and depression, which we will try to feebly overcome by medicating ourselves with phony relationships, social media, addiction, consumerism, etc.

Without a purpose, we will be butterflies pinned to a wall, our legs helplessly flailing.

Without purpose, we will suffer from ennui, a state of perpetual boredom with life that leaves us sluggish, numb, and depressed.

Without purpose, we will suffer from the spiritual disease of acedia, the lethargy and fatigue that results from living in a fog of no meaning and purpose.

Frankl observed in the concentration camps two kinds of prisoners, those with a purpose and those without.

Those without a purpose were the first to give up on life. Many of us have given up on life and we don’t even know it.

We’re closed in by the despair from having given up on life. We die a slow death. We are trapped and closed in by our hopeless condition.

To give up on life is to be oppressed by our own despair. We are our own oppressor and enemy. We are the cause of our oppression and confinement. Frankl will make a reference to this condition later in the book. The Hebrew word for this imprisonment, this “tightness and being closed in,” is called mitzrayim. Finding purpose and meaning is the way out of our mitzrayim, our confinement.

The prisoners who had given up on life died more quickly. We read in the Foreword by Harold Kushner that, “They died less from lack of food or medicine than from lack of hope, lack of something to live for.”

Frankl had a purpose. He needed to survive the concentration camps, so he could teach the world the lessons he learned about the importance of finding meaning. Teaching the world the importance of meaning became his meaning.

Frankl identifies three areas where we find meaning, as we read in Kushner’s Foreword:

Work, “doing something significant”

Love, “caring for another person”

Courage in difficult times: Suffering requires courage. “Suffering in and of itself is meaningless; we give our suffering meaning by the way in which we respond to it”: with or without courage.

The attitude we cultivate toward suffering determines what kind of person we are. Frankl writes that a person “may remain brave, dignified and unselfish, or in the bitter fight for self-preservation he may forget his human dignity and become no more than an animal.”

Few people choose to be brave and dignified, but according to Frankl, the difficulty of the task that not absolve any of us the responsibility to choose a path of meaning. In other words, the road to hell is wide and the road to heaven is narrow. It’s “easy” to live a meaningless life. Most people lead meaningless lives of “quiet despair.”

But a meaningless life is in truth not “easy” because it results in a despair that eats away at us.

But what is purpose?

I know people who believe there is no purpose and they are happy. Life is about appreciating every moment and "doing your thing" or doing what "turns you on." They would argue you should be interested and engaged with life, but these things don't necessarily make purpose. 

What if you spend all your time collecting butterflies or studying dolphins? Is that purpose?

What if you're a book critic and read obsessively? Do you have purpose?

Do people find purpose or find obsessions? What's the difference?

Is an engaging distraction or diversion the same as meaning?

Two. How does Frankl’s idea of meaning conflict with the world’s idea of human beings’ primary motivation? (see Arthur C. Brooks' "Love People, Not Pleasure") 

Kushner writes, “Life is not primarily a quest for pleasure, as Freud believed, or a quest for power, as Alfred Adler taught, but a quest for meaning.”

Conventional notions of success, based on the acquiring of pleasure and power, obscure the fact that life’s primary drive is to find meaning, which is the only ticket out of our personal hell of emptiness and despair.

Frankl’s book is a refutation against a world that promotes this conventional idea of “success.”

Pleasure is doomed to fail because of the hedonic treadmill: We acclimate to pleasure so that we always become numb to it.

Power is doomed to corrupt and make us evil: We will feel compelled to control and manipulate others as feeble compensation for the emptiness and despair that informs our meaningless existence.

Three. For Harold Kushner, what is the book’s most “enduring insight”?

Kushner writes: “Forces beyond your control can take away everything you possess except one thing, your freedom to choose how you will respond to the situation. You cannot control what happens to you in life, but you can always control what you will feel and do about what happens to you.”

Most of us define our wellbeing on our materialistic station in life: our things, our comforts, our routines, our reliance on family, and our good health.

But in the blink of an eye, anything can happen that will strip us all these things that we assumed gave us a foundation in life.

Frankl came from a loving family and suddenly the Nazis plucked him and his family members from their loving environment into the hell of the concentration camps.

The Nazis stripped Frankl of everything, but one thing Frankl would not give them was the dignity of his soul.

Some of Frankl’s fellow prisoners, after the liberation, lived like angry animals with the attitude that, “The world let this hell happen to me, so screw the world. I will go on a rampage!”

By embracing this bitter attitude, these prisoners lost their souls and became their worst enemies.

Frankl says we have the freedom to choose the attitude we will have in the face of suffering. We are accountable for having a noble and courageous attitude in the face of this suffering.

Four. What implicit moral condemnation of the American news reporters does Frankl give in his Preface?

The reporters always start interviewing Frankl by talking about how his book is this amazing best-selling success. By doing so, they miss the point: The book points to a terrible fact: “ an expression of misery of our time: if hundreds of thousands of people reach out for a book whose very title promises to deal with the question of a meaning to life, it must be a question that burns under their fingernails.”

The reporters shouldn’t be so intoxicated by the book’s “success”; rather, they should focus on the public’s hunger for meaning, and why this hunger is such a chronic problem.

Frankl disdains society’s ambition for best-selling books and “success.” He never wanted any fame for writing his book. Originally, he was going to write it anonymously but decided for credibility’s sake to put his name on it.

He is against success. He writes, “Again and again I . . . admonish my students both in Europe and in America: ‘Don’t aim at success—the more you aim at it and make it a target, the more you are going to miss it.’ For success, like happiness, cannot be pursued; it must ensue, and it only does so as the unintended side-effect of one’s dedication to a cause greater than oneself or as the by-product of one’s surrender to a person other than oneself. Happiness must happen, and the same holds for success: you have to let it happen by not caring about it. I want you to listen to what your conscience commands you to do and go on to carry it out to the best of your knowledge. Then you will live to see that in the long run—in the long run, I say!—success will follow you precisely because you had forgotten to think of it.”

The irony is that people who seek happiness the most are the least happy and that people who seek not happiness but meaning are the most fulfilled (true definition of happiness).

Seeking happiness for its own sake is an infantile, childish impulse; therefore, it is doomed to fail from the start.

Five. What “three phases of the inmate’s mental reactions to camp life become apparent”?

Phase 1: Shock

The first phase is shock, which can be a sort of disbelief we feel as we’re still processing the information.

Sometimes this state of shock and denial was accompanied by a “delusion of reprieve,” the belief that none of this was happening and that everything would be okay.

Such a delusion was perhaps necessary in a hell where 90 percent of the prisoners were selected for immediate death in the “bath” house.

In this hell, fellow prisoners pointed to the smoke and said, “That’s where your friend is, floating up to Heaven.”

The new prisoners were in too much shock to believe in this: Either you would die, or have everything, including your wedding ring, taken away. Even all their head and body hair would be shaved off and the hair would be used for industrial use.

Frankl is deluded into thinking he will be able to hold on to his manuscript, his “life’s work.”

The shock is slowly accompanied by a dark sense of humor and a “cold curiosity” for the horrors of this remarkable hell on earth. “How bad can things get? Is there a bottom on human depravity and evil or is there no bottom at all?”

During this first phase, everyone is tempted to commit suicide, to run into the wire, for a brief time.

To keep the will to live during this suicidal phase, a prisoner explains that one must keep shaved and “stand and walk smartly.” Letting oneself go is the first step in giving up on life.

We read, as Frankl quotes Doris Lessing, that an “abnormal reaction to an abnormal situation is normal behavior.”

Phase 2: Apathy

The second phase of this “abnormal reaction” was apathy, in which the prisoner “achieved a kind of emotional death.”

He needed to deaden the tortures of being separated by his loved ones.

Being surrounded by filth and excrement added to his disgust, which translated into apathy.

He becomes hardened by the suffering he sees around him. This is an adaptation, a “necessary protective shell.”

The only time Frankl felt any emotion during the apathy stage was when the guards insulted his humanity with their blows and humiliations. Indignation was the result of an insult, and it would not be accepted under any conditions (25).

As the apathy continues, some prisoners will experience the “intensification of their inner life.” As an example, Frankl has a transcendent experience in which he feels his wife’s loving presence, which becomes a source of strength to him (37-38).

Humor was also learned to keep the prisoners from going completely crazy in their hell (44).

Phase 3: Depersonalization

Being reduced to an animal fighting tooth and claw for survival could strip a man of his dignity and his soul.

We read that, “If the man in the concentration camp did not struggle against this [attack on his fundamental humanity] in a last effort to save his self-respect, he lost the feeling of being an individual, a being with a mind, with inner freedom and personal value. He thought of himself then as only a part of an enormous mass of people; his existence descended to the level of animal life” (50).

Six. How does Death in Tehran explain the manner in which we are too often our worst enemy?

A rich and mighty Persian once walked in his garden with one of his servants. The servant cried that he had just encountered Death, who had threatened him. He begged his master to give him his fastest horse so that he could make haste and flee to Teheran, which he could reach that same evening. The master consented and the servant galloped off on the horse. On returning to his house the master himself met Death, and questioned him, “Why did you terrify and threaten my servant?” “I did not threaten him; I only showed surprise in still finding him here when I planned to meet him tonight in Teheran,” said Death.

Fear Accelerates Your Doom

Often our fear accelerates us to the very fate we wish to escape from. For example, time and time again Frankl refused to take the easy way out when offered “easier” camps and these “easier” camps raged with famine and even cannibalism (56).

Fate Cannot be Avoided. You Can Only Control Your Attitude Toward What Happens to You

Staying loyal to his commitment to his patients in the camp gave Frankl an “inward peace” he would not have experienced had he acted in self-interest.

You Are Your Worst Enemy

You accelerate your own death by abandoning meaning and serving your self-interests. 

Frankl’s book makes us ask what really is self-interest in the context of self-interested altruism, knowing the benefits we gain from helping others (59).

 

Seven. What radical claim about free will does Frankl make in the context of the depersonalization that occurred at the concentration camps? (free will argument)

On page 65, we read

 In attempting this psychological presentation and a psychopathological explanation of the typical characteristics of a concentration camp inmate, I may give the impression that the human being is completely and unavoidably influenced by his surroundings. (In this case the surroundings being the unique structure of camp life, which forced the prisoner to conform his conduct to a certain set pattern.) But what about human liberty? Is there no spiritual freedom in regard to behavior and reaction to any given surroundings? Is that theory true which would have us believe that man is no more than a product of many conditional and environmental factors — be they of a biological, psychological or sociological nature? Is man but an accidental product of these? Most important, do the prisoners' reactions to the singular world of the concentration camp prove that man cannot escape the influences of his surroundings? Does man have no choice of action in the face of such circumstances?

We can answer these questions from experience as well as on principle. The experiences of camp life show that man does have a choice of action. There were enough examples, often of a heroic nature, which proved that apathy could be overcome, irritability suppressed. Man can preserve a vestige of spiritual freedom, of independence of mind, even in such terrible conditions of psychic and physical stress.

We who lived, in concentration camps can remember the men who walked through the huts comforting others, giving away their last piece of bread. They may have been few in number, but they offer sufficient proof that everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms — to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way.

And there were always choices to make. Every day, every hour, offered the opportunity to make a decision, a decision which determined whether you would or would not submit to those powers which threatened to rob you of your very self, your inner freedom; which determined whether or not you would become the plaything of circumstance, renouncing freedom and dignity to become molded into the form of the typical inmate.

Seen from this point of view, the mental reactions of the inmates of a concentration camp must seem more to us than the mere expression of certain physical and sociological conditions. Even though conditions such as lack of sleep, insufficient food and various mental stresses may suggest that the inmates were bound to react in certain ways, in the final analysis it becomes clear that the sort of person the prisoner became was the result of an inner decision, and not the result of camp influences alone. Fundamentally, therefore, any man can, even under such circumstances, decide what shall become of him — mentally and spiritually. He may retain his human dignity even in a concentration camp. Dostoevski said once, "There is only one thing that I dread: not to be worthy of my sufferings." These words frequently came to my mind after I became acquainted with those martyrs whose behavior in camp, whose suffering and death, bore witness to the fact that the last inner freedom cannot be lost. It can be said that they were worthy of their sufferings; the way they bore their suffering was a genuine inner achievement. It is this spiritual freedom — which cannot be taken away — that makes life meaningful and purposeful.

An active life serves the purpose of giving man the opportunity to realize values in creative work, while a passive life of enjoyment affords him the opportunity to obtain fulfillment in experiencing beauty, art, or nature. But there is also purpose in that life which is almost barren of both creation and enjoyment and which admits of but one possibility of high moral behavior: namely, in man's attitude to his existence, an existence restricted by external forces. A creative life and a life of enjoyment are banned to him. But not only creativeness and enjoyment are meaningful. If there is a meaning in life at all, then there must be a meaning in suffering. Suffering is an ineradicable part of life, even as fate and death. Without suffering and death human life cannot be complete.

The way in which a man accepts his fate and all the suffering it entails, the way in which he takes up his cross, gives him ample opportunity — even under the most difficult circumstances — to add a deeper meaning to his life. It may remain brave, dignified and unselfish. Or in the bitter fight for self-preservation he may forget his human dignity and become no more than an animal. Here lies the chance for a man either to make use of or to forgo the opportunities of attaining the moral values that a difficult situation may afford him. And this decides whether he is worthy of his sufferings or not.

Eight. What makes choosing the good life of sacrifice and meaning so difficult?

We read that even though we are motivated and think about living a good life, we quickly forget our resolutions. As we read:

Those of us who saw the film called Resurrection — taken from a book by Tolstoy — years ago, may have had similar thoughts. Here were great destinies and great men. For us, at that time, there was no great fate; there was no chance to achieve such greatness. After the picture we went to the nearest cafe, and over a cup of coffee and a sandwich we forgot the strange metaphysical thoughts which for one moment had crossed our minds. But when we ourselves were confronted with a great destiny and faced with the decision of meeting it with equal spiritual greatness, by then we had forgotten our youthful resolutions of long ago, and we failed.

Perhaps there came a day for some of us when we saw the same film again, or a similar one. But by then other pictures may have simultaneously unrolled before one's inner eye; pictures of people who attained much more in their lives than a sentimental film could show. Some details of a particular man's inner greatness may have come to one's mind, like the story of the young woman whose death I witnessed in a concentration camp. It is a simple story. There is little to tell and it may sound as if I had invented it; but to me it seems like a poem.

This young woman knew that she would die in the next few days. But when I talked to her she was cheerful in spite of this knowledge. "I am grateful that fate has hit me so hard," she told me. "In my former life I was spoiled and did not take spiritual accomplishments seriously." Pointing through the window of the hut, she said, "This tree here is the only friend I have in my loneliness." Through that window she could see just one branch of a chestnut tree, and on the branch were two blossoms. "I often talk to this tree," she said to me. I was startled and didn't quite know how to take her words. Was she delirious? Did she have occasional hallucinations? Anxiously I asked her if the tree replied. "Yes." What did it say to her? She answered, "It said to me, 'I am here — I am here — I am life, eternal life.'" ...

that while the surroundings are overwhelming, there still exists “human liberty” and “spiritual freedom.” Frankl writes, “The experiences of camp life show that man does have a choice of action. There were enough examples, often of a heroic nature, which proved that apathy could be overcome, irritability suppressed. Man can preserve a vestige of spiritual freedom, of independence of mind, even in such terrible conditions of psychic and physical stress.”

Nine. How did the “intensification” of Frankl’s inner life help him transcend his suffering?

We stumbled on in the darkness, over big stones and through large puddles, along the one road leading from the camp. The accompanying guards kept shouting at us and driving us with the butts of their rifles. Anyone with very sore feet supported himself on his neighbor's arm. Hardly a word was spoken; the icy wind did not encourage talk. Hiding his mouth behind his upturned collar, the man marching next to me whispered suddenly: "If our wives could see us now! I do hope they are better off in their camps and don't know what is happening to us."

That brought thoughts of my own wife to mind. And as we stumbled on for miles, slipping on icy spots, supporting each other time and again, dragging one another up and onward, nothing was said, but we both knew: each of us was thinking of his wife. Occasionally I looked at the sky, where the stars were fading and the pink light of the morning was beginning to spread behind a dark bank of clouds. But my mind clung to my wife's image, imagining it with an uncanny acuteness. I heard her answering me, saw her smile, her frank and encouraging look. Real or not, her look was then more luminous than the sun which was beginning to rise.

A thought transfixed me: for the first time in my life I saw the truth as it is set into song by so many poets, proclaimed as the final wisdom by so many thinkers. The truth — that love is the ultimate and the highest goal to which man can aspire. Then I grasped the meaning of the greatest secret that human poetry and human thought and belief have to impart: The salvation of man is through love and in love. I understood how a man who has nothing left in this world still may know bliss, be it only for a brief moment, in the contemplation of his beloved. In a position of utter desolation, when man cannot express himself in positive action, when his only achievement may consist in enduring his sufferings in the right way — an honorable way — in such a position man can, through loving contemplation of the image he carries of his beloved, achieve fulfillment. For the first time in my life I was able to understand the meaning of the words, "The angels are lost in perpetual contemplation of an infinite glory."

In front of me a man stumbled and those following him fell on top of him. The guard rushed over and used his whip on them all. Thus my thoughts were interrupted for a few minutes. But soon my soul found its way back from the prisoner's existence to another world, and I resumed talk with my loved one: I asked her questions, and she answered; she questioned me in return, and I answered.

"Stop!" We had arrived at our work site. Everybody rushed into the dark hut in the hope of getting a fairly decent tool. Each prisoner got a spade or a pickaxe.

"Can't you hurry up, you pigs?" Soon we had resumed the previous day's positions in the ditch. The frozen ground cracked under the point of the pickaxes, and sparks flew. The men were silent, their brains numb.

My mind still clung to the image of my wife. A thought crossed my mind: I didn't even know if she were still alive. I knew only one thing — which I have learned well by now: Love goes very far beyond the physical person of the beloved. It finds its deepest meaning in his spiritual being, his inner self. Whether or not he is actually present, whether or not he is still alive at all, ceases somehow to be of importance.

I did not know whether my wife was alive, and I had no means of finding out (during all my prison life there was no outgoing or incoming mail); but at that moment it ceased to matter. There was no need for me to know; nothing could touch the strength of my love, my thoughts, and the image of my beloved. Had I known then that my wife was dead, I think that I would still have given myself, undisturbed by that knowledge, to the contemplation of her image, and that my mental conversation with her would have been just as vivid and just as satisfying. "Set me like a seal upon thy heart, love is as strong as death."

Ten. Frankl’s central thesis is also at the heart of one of mankind’s greatest controversies. Explain (Review of Question #7).

... In attempting this psychological presentation and a psychopathological explanation of the typical characteristics of a concentration camp inmate, I may give the impression that the human being is completely and unavoidably influenced by his surroundings. (In this case the surroundings being the unique structure of camp life, which forced the prisoner to conform his conduct to a certain set pattern.) But what about human liberty? Is there no spiritual freedom in regard to behavior and reaction to any given surroundings? Is that theory true which would have us believe that man is no more than a product of many conditional and environmental factors — be they of a biological, psychological or sociological nature? Is man but an accidental product of these? Most important, do the prisoners' reactions to the singular world of the concentration camp prove that man cannot escape the influences of his surroundings? Does man have no choice of action in the face of such circumstances?

We can answer these questions from experience as well as on principle. The experiences of camp life show that man does have a choice of action. There were enough examples, often of a heroic nature, which proved that apathy could be overcome, irritability suppressed. Man can preserve a vestige of spiritual freedom, of independence of mind, even in such terrible conditions of psychic and physical stress.

We who lived, in concentration camps can remember the men who walked through the huts comforting others, giving away their last piece of bread. They may have been few in number, but they offer sufficient proof that everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms — to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way.

And there were always choices to make. Every day, every hour, offered the opportunity to make a decision, a decision which determined whether you would or would not submit to those powers which threatened to rob you of your very self, your inner freedom; which determined whether or not you would become the plaything of circumstance, renouncing freedom and dignity to become molded into the form of the typical inmate.

Seen from this point of view, the mental reactions of the inmates of a concentration camp must seem more to us than the mere expression of certain physical and sociological conditions. Even though conditions such as lack of sleep, insufficient food and various mental stresses may suggest that the inmates were bound to react in certain ways, in the final analysis it becomes clear that the sort of person the prisoner became was the result of an inner decision, and not the result of camp influences alone. Fundamentally, therefore, any man can, even under such circumstances, decide what shall become of him — mentally and spiritually. He may retain his human dignity even in a concentration camp. Dostoevski said once, "There is only one thing that I dread: not to be worthy of my sufferings." These words frequently came to my mind after I became acquainted with those martyrs whose behavior in camp, whose suffering and death, bore witness to the fact that the last inner freedom cannot be lost. It can be said that they were worthy of their sufferings; the way they bore their suffering was a genuine inner achievement. It is this spiritual freedom — which cannot be taken away — that makes life meaningful and purposeful.

An active life serves the purpose of giving man the opportunity to realize values in creative work, while a passive life of enjoyment affords him the opportunity to obtain fulfillment in experiencing beauty, art, or nature. But there is also purpose in that life which is almost barren of both creation and enjoyment and which admits of but one possibility of high moral behavior: namely, in man's attitude to his existence, an existence restricted by external forces. A creative life and a life of enjoyment are banned to him. But not only creativeness and enjoyment are meaningful. If there is a meaning in life at all, then there must be a meaning in suffering. Suffering is an ineradicable part of life, even as fate and death. Without suffering and death human life cannot be complete.

The way in which a man accepts his fate and all the suffering it entails, the way in which he takes up his cross, gives him ample opportunity — even under the most difficult circumstances — to add a deeper meaning to his life. It may remain brave, dignified and unselfish. Or in the bitter fight for self-preservation he may forget his human dignity and become no more than an animal. Here lies the chance for a man either to make use of or to forgo the opportunities of attaining the moral values that a difficult situation may afford him. And this decides whether he is worthy of his sufferings or not.

Do not think that these considerations are unworldly and too far removed from real life. It is true that only a few people are capable of reaching such high moral standards. Of the prisoners only a few kept their full inner liberty and obtained those values which their suffering afforded, but even one such example is sufficient proof that man's inner strength may raise him above his outward fate. Such men are not only in concentration camps. Everywhere man is confronted with fate, with the chance of achieving something through his own suffering.

Take the fate of the sick — especially those who are incurable. I once read a letter written by a young invalid, in which he told a friend that he had just found out he would not live for long, that even an operation would be of no help. He wrote further that he remembered a film he had seen in which a man was portrayed who waited for death in a courageous and dignified way. The boy had thought it a great accomplishment to meet death so well. Now — he wrote — fate was offering him a similar chance.

Eleven. What is the link between suffering and meaning?

An active life serves the purpose of giving man the opportunity to realize values in creative work, while a passive life of enjoyment affords him the opportunity to obtain fulfillment in experiencing beauty, art, or nature. But there is also purpose in that life which is almost barren of both creation and enjoyment and which admits of but one possibility of high moral behavior: namely, in man's attitude to his existence, an existence restricted by external forces. A creative life and a life of enjoyment are banned to him. But not only creativeness and enjoyment are meaningful. If there is a meaning in life at all, then there must be a meaning in suffering. Suffering is an ineradicable part of life, even as fate and death. Without suffering and death human life cannot be complete.

The way in which a man accepts his fate and all the suffering it entails, the way in which he takes up his cross, gives him ample opportunity — even under the most difficult circumstances — to add a deeper meaning to his life. It may remain brave, dignified and unselfish. Or in the bitter fight for self-preservation he may forget his human dignity and become no more than an animal. Here lies the chance for a man either to make use of or to forgo the opportunities of attaining the moral values that a difficult situation may afford him. And this decides whether he is worthy of his sufferings or not.

Do not think that these considerations are unworldly and too far removed from real life. It is true that only a few people are capable of reaching such high moral standards. Of the prisoners only a few kept their full inner liberty and obtained those values which their suffering afforded, but even one such example is sufficient proof that man's inner strength may raise him above his outward fate. Such men are not only in concentration camps. Everywhere man is confronted with fate, with the chance of achieving something through his own suffering.

Short Story Resource

Here's a short story that you can use as a resource. It's about a student who challenges Viktor Frankl and his professor:

Using Dialectical Method to Sharpen Your Thesis

Entertain oppositional ideas. We call this the dialectical method or dialectical argument. 

Option Three

In a 1,400-word essay, defend, support, or complicate the argument that even though Frankl’s philosophy is informed by his religious faith, one need not be religious to embrace Frankl’s precepts and principles. You can concede that Frankl’s book is “religious” but not in the narrow sense of the word. Rather, it is universally religious. On the other hand, some will argue that the theistic religion that informs Frankl’s philosophy is too narrow to accommodate secular and atheist thinkers. Take a position and explain. You may want to consult Elizabeth Anderson’s “If God Is Dead, Is Everything Permitted?”

Dialectical Argument About Frankl's Faith in Meaning

 

While Viktor Frankl is clearly a noble, wise, intelligent, and sincere man, his treatise on the search for meaning holds no water when we distance ourselves emotionally from Frankl’s plight and study the idea of meaning objectively. Sparing our brain the intoxication and bias born of pity, piety, and our natural sympathy for Frankl, we can see that Frankl’s claim that we must find meaning is erroneous and rooted in faith, not evidence. His belief in meaning is not a claim of fact; it is a rationale, a survival coping mechanism, if you will, that he created in order that he might convince himself that there was some “sense” or “meaning” to his unspeakable suffering. Secondly, Frankl conveniently omits millions upon millions of cases of suffering that are clearly senseless such as starving children and children born from drug-addicted mothers and sectarian brutality that results in the agonizing deaths of the innocent. Third, the widespread devastation of natural disasters annihilates entire populations so quickly they do not have the privilege to step back for even one second and contemplate the “meaning” of what has just happened to them.

Opposition to the Above

Our Frankl detractor who exacts his Frankl refutation with such verve and self-rectitude is perhaps a bit too full of his own rhetorical certitude to see the logical fallacies of his claims. First, he admits that Frankl created a “coping mechanism” to address his suffering, and if our Frankl detractor read the book carefully he would understand that it is precisely these coping mechanisms, Frankl claims, that give us meaning. The detractor’s second assertion, that hunger and brutality often render suffering to be senseless, does not contradict Frankl’s argument. To the contrary, Frankl argues that it is precisely why we live in a world where suffering can visit us without warning or sense that we must while we can cultivate a courageous attitude toward our own inevitable suffering and death.   The Frankl detractor would have us believe that Frankl fails because he has failed to prevent senseless suffering from visiting Planet Earth when in fact Frankl is arguing that we must radically change who we are to meet the very challenges that result from such suffering.

So, McMahon, which argument do you believe in?

My reply: It depends on when you ask me. It depends on how I feel. My thoughts on Frankl are tentative, not absolute. And critical thinkers tend to be more tentative, not absolute, which is a sign of lazy, non-thinking.

For Effective Critical Thinking, We Must Know the Main Ideas of the Text

Overview: The Thirteen Tenets (Principles) from Man’s Search for Meaning

Before we examine disingenuous and sincere nihilism, we should first look at nihilism’s opposite, the belief in meaning as laid out by Viktor Frankl, of which there are thirteen major tenets:

 

1. The human condition is suffering and the only viable response to suffering is to find meaning. We must therefore acknowledge that there is a purpose in life, greater than the purpose we find in creative work and passive enjoyment, which “admits of but one possibility of high moral behavior: namely, in man’s attitude to his existence, an existence restricted by external forces.” It is imperative that we are motivated first and foremost by this higher purpose. Without a purpose, our life drags on day after day in a tiring monotony that we try to fill with consumerism, addictions, texting friends, etc.
2. “Man can preserve a vestige of spiritual freedom, of independence of mind, even in such terrible conditions of psychic and physical stress” as was endured in the concentration camps. Acknowledging this freedom, we must defy being a “plaything of circumstance” and thus we must understand that “there is a danger inherent in the teaching of man’s ‘nothingbutness,’ the theory that man is nothing but the result of biological, psychological and sociological conditions, or the product of heredity and environment. Such a view of man makes a neurotic believe what he is prone to believe anyway, namely, that he is the pawn and victim of outer influences or inner circumstances.” We are neither pawn nor victim. Rather, we possess an inner freedom that cannot be lost no matter how extreme the circumstances. This inner freedom allows us to be worthy of our suffering. And being worthy of our suffering is the ultimatum life presents us: Either be worthy of our suffering, or not. 
3. Life presents us with the moral imperative to treat our life as something of significance and consequence and the converse is also true: We must not despise our lives and treat our lives as if they were of no consequence at all. As Frankl writes: “And there were always choices to make. Every day, every hour, offered the opportunity make a decision, a decision which determined whether you would or would not submit to those powers which threatened to rob you of your very self, your inner freedom: which determined whether or not you would become the plaything of circumstance, renouncing freedom and dignity to become molded into the form of the typical inmate.”
4. There are moral absolutes in this world evidenced in part by Frankl dividing the world into two races of people, decent and indecent.
5. We have to do more than imagine a life of meaning; we must actually live it. Frankl writes: “Life ultimately means taking the responsibility to find the right answer to its problems and to fulfill the tasks which it constantly sets for each individual.” We are additionally accountable for the responsibilities life demands of us.
6. We must embrace suffering, the finiteness of life, and death to maximize and complete our life. “Suffering is an ineradicable part of life, even as fate and death. Without suffering and death human life cannot be complete.”
7. We must radically alter our attitude by changing our orientation from “What do I expect from life?” to “What does life expect from me?” This question brings up our number one responsibility in life, to embrace meaning when it knocks on our door. We don’t choose meaning; meaning chooses us.
8. There is no One Size Fits All Meaning. Every person’s meaning is specific to his or her circumstances.
9. We must confront the emotions that seem so overwhelming; otherwise those emotions will devour us. Quoting from Spinoza, Frankl writes: “Emotion, which is suffering, ceases to be suffering as soon as we form a clear and precise picture of it.” It’s another way of saying that when we confront our demons, they often lose their power over us.
10. We must not abuse and squander freedom by imitating our oppressors. For example, if our boss abuses us, we should not later in life abuse our workers when we ascend to positions of high authority.
11. Meaning cannot be found within ourselves; it must be found in the world. As Frankl writes: “By declaring that man is responsible and must actualize the potential meaning of his life, I wish to stress that the true meaning of life is to be discovered in the world rather than within man or his own psyche, as though it were a closed system. I have termed this constitutive characteristic “the self-transcendence of human existence.” It denotes the fact that being human always points, and is directed, to something, or someone, other than oneself—be it a meaning to fulfill or another human being to encounter. The more one forgets himself—by giving himself to a cause to serve or another person to love—the more human he is and the more he actualizes himself. What is called self-actualization is not an attainable aim at all, for the simple reason that the more one would strive for it, the more he would miss it. In other words, self-actualization is possible only as a side-effect of self-transcendence.”
12. No matter how despicable and worthless our lives have been, we are called to redeem ourselves by living out the essential rule of logotherapy: “Live as if you were living already for the second time and as if you had acted the first time as wrongly as you are about to act now!”
13. Only a few people are capable of reaching great spiritual heights but the difficulty and small percentage of people who do reach such great heights does not abnegate our responsibility for pursuing a life of higher meaning.

Frankl’s Central Argument in 3 Sentences

One. No matter the circumstances, we all have the free will and therefore the responsibility to choose a dignified, meaningful life in the face of even the worst suffering.

Two. Failure to create a meaningful life for ourselves will result in the existential vacuum or unbearable emptiness.

Three. Without meaning we will try to fill the gnawing void with misguided distractions that will destroy us.

Some might conclude that Frankl's world is binary or either/or: Either we connect to life with meaning or we fail to find meaning and suffer the despair and regret of disconnection.

Others might conclude that meaning, contrary to Frankl, exists on a sliding scale or is relative and that this nuanced view of meaning eludes Frankl's strident message.

 There are 3 points of view regarding Frankl’s message

1. Kool-Aid Drinkers or Cheerleaders: We embrace his message without having a specific understanding of it, so all we can do is recycle feel-good clichés and hackneyed truisms about living a meaningful life. People who become cheerleaders for a cause without rigorous questioning are called many things: true believers, homers, Kool-Aid Drinkers, clones, ditto-heads. Such people tend to be mediocrities or ciphers, nonentities, who wish to hide their vapid personalities by losing themselves in a cause that is larger and more glorious than they will ever be on their own.
2. Cynics or Nihilists: We dismiss the idea of meaning as a fool’s illusion, a societal construction. There is no meaning. We do what makes us happy, what makes us tick, what gets us out of bed in the morning. There is no moral absolute, just doing things relative to our happiness. Many cynics will simply see life as a cruel joke from which we must insulate ourselves with brain-numbing distractions and cheap thrills. Many nihilists will devote their lives to pleasure, hedonism, and egotism because there is no meaning. Some people argue that a lot of nihilists know there is meaning but deny it to justify a lazy, irresponsible, head-in-the-sand life. 
3. Open-Minded Skeptic: With a specific understanding of Frankl’s terms, the OMS may, or may not, accept some of Frankl’s message with certain conditions or caveats. This latter point of view is, in my opinion, the most reasonable and sophisticated for reasons we will now look at:

Evaluating Frankl’s Message Without Being His Cheerleader or a Cynic

The problem isn’t the message. Man's Search for Meaning contains a great message, indisputable in many ways. The problem is threefold:

The Problem of Specificity and Definition

Specificity: dealing with specific notions of meaning, free will, responsibility, to name a few. Without specifics, we’re simply rehashing feel-good clichés. As a result, the level of writing is fifth grade instead of college. We must avoid writing like fifth graders.

When dealing with terms like meaning, free will, responsibility, and other grandiose abstractions, we achieve specificity in several ways. Here are a few:

One. Be skeptical of clichés, overused terms and phrases like “think outside the box,” which is, ironically, so “inside the box.”  

Here’s an example of the term meaning being reduced to a cliché:  A man says, “My family is my meaning. Taking care of them, providing for them, that is my meaning. So don’t talk to me about meaning.”

This is a cliché that doesn’t mean anything. In fact, this man may work his butt off for his wife and children to the point that his life is one thing: MAMMAP—make as much money as possible. There’s good reason to make lots of money. It’s helpful, but it doesn’t define meaning. In fact, this man may be teaching his family that money is the elixir for all of life’s woes, thus afflicting his family with materialism and greed. In fact, this man may be addicted to work even as he becomes more and more emotionally disconnected from his family.

Here’s another example.

Someone says, “My faith in God gives me meaning.” That’s very possible, since in fact Frankl’s faith in God helped him find meaning in the concentration camps, but too many people engage in religious ritual and carry religious beliefs out of unquestioned habit. Meaning cannot be achieved by repetitious, unexamined behavior. Such behavior is mindless and being mindless cannot forge a path to meaning.

Here’s another example.

I derive meaning from my job, my career. We would be wise to gain meaning from our career, but too often our job title gives us a certain status and identity that becomes a mask.

Take away our job and often we lose our identity; there’s no meaningful core behind the title, just an emptiness. You hear about professional athletes all the time who retire from their sport and then live a life of moral dissolution, becoming drug addicts and alcoholics. You hear of people retiring from any job and going into a depression. A lot of people die shortly after retirement.

So we must be cautious of equating our job with meaning.

Two. Turn away from the absolute and move toward the relative by positioning the term on a scale. In other words, see the gray or nuance of a definition. Don’t use the term meaning in terms of black and white such as your life either has meaning or it has no meaning. Rather, consider the idea of meaning moving up and down a scale. 

We get into trouble when we talk about meaning as in Absolute Ultimate Meaning. Now we’ve turned meaning into this elusive Holy Grail, Elixir, or Chimera, a cure-all mirage.

Rather, we should look at meaning as relative on a scale. Instead of saying our life has meaning or does not meaning, we can say we are tending toward meaning or tending away from meaning.

Examples of People Trending Away From Or Toward Meaning

A forty-five-year-old man, living with his mother, who sits in his pajamas all day while surfing the Internet and eating Hot Pockets is probably tending away from meaning. 

A woman who has devoted her life to rescuing dogs from cruel puppy mills is probably tending toward meaning. She’s probably trending toward meaning.

A wealthy doctor languishes in his unfurnished house two years after his wife left him, taking all the furniture with her. He’s probably low on the Meaning Scale, that is to say, he is trending away from meaning in his narcissistic self-pity.

Any kind of addictive behavior in which one is seeking oblivion and numbness and disengagement from others is probably tending away from meaning.   

Three. To strengthen your definition, put your term in a context or circumstance. 

Example:

Meaning: From Sloth to Creativity

When Tennessee Williams the playwright became famous, he gave up writing, holed himself up in a hotel suite and ordered room service, champagne, and prostitutes until about six months into his debauchery he realized he was going crazy. He left the hotel, went to Mexico, and wrote his masterpiece A Streetcar Named Desire. For him, meaning was about struggle, hard work, and vocation. He discovered an important truth about meaning: The creative energy inside him to fulfill his artistic gifts had to be used; otherwise it would turn inward and kill him with self-destructive behavior. This is a truth Frankl witnessed in the concentration camps.

Not all suffering leads to meaning

It’s difficult to imagine meaning existing at all in some circumstances. For example, a student came to my office to tell me she didn’t believe in meaning. This is an 18-year-old whose boyfriend drives a BMW M3. She explained that a starving 3-year-old girl in Ethiopia watching her family die of starvation and disease and knows she has just a few months left to live has no meaning. I think we can say that such a person finds little relevance in a discussion about meaning.

While there are no absolute definitions of meaning, or non-meaning, there are extreme circumstances that make us even wonder if meaning exists for everyone.

Four. Use negation, what the term is NOT. Abstractions like meaning, love, fulfillment, etc., can be effectively understood when we examine their negation, fallacies, and misguided definitions.

Examples of Negation:

Meaning is not talking about it. 

Why? Because with few exceptions, meaning is not talking about it. As we learned from the people of Thailand, if we live a rich life, we don’t think or talk too much. We’re too busy living. My cousin in Studio City seems like this. He’s a man with little thought or talk about meaning who lives a very full life.

However, Viktor Frankl was forced to think about meaning when he saw people lose or gain their humanity in the concentration camps. Under these extreme circumstances, he felt compelled to meditate on the effects of meaning, or its absence, in people’s lives. In other words, he’s earned the right to talk about meaning. 

Indeed, meaning is often not talking about meaning. Meaning is living life in a way that gives us hope for a better future and purpose. 

Meaning is not happiness and success.

Happiness and success can be taken from us at any time. As Frankl tells us, meaning is having the moral character to embrace suffering with courage.

In his book Frankl explains what meaning is NOT:

Meaning is not a panacea handed to you on a silver platter that instantly changes your life.

Meaning is not something your therapist can give you.

Meaning is not ONE THING that everyone finds.

Meaning is not something everyone is going to agree upon. The God of your religion that gives you meaning might very well be at war with the God of someone else’s religion.

Writing Against Frankl's Argument That We Must Find Meaning to Escape the Despair of the Existential Vacuum

McMahon's Doubts about Meaning:

We Can Have Life's 8 Human Needs Without Having Absolute Meaning and Therefore Argue for Frankl Lite: 

When I ask myself if there is meaning, I begin with fundamental human needs. They aren't meaning as described by Frankl, but most of us can be happy with them. They include the following: 

One. We need to believe in something larger than ourselves so we don't become crushed by the weight of our inclination for self-centeredness and narcissism. 

We can't believe in just anything. There's a huge caveat or condition: This "thing" we believe in should be good, conducive to our maturity and dignity and the dignity and respect of others.We can't, for example, believe in killing others to achieve some political goal motivated by a lust for power. Then we are monsters like Pol Pot and Stalin and Hitler. 

If this thing is good, it doesn't necessarily create meaning. For example, if we develop an interest in martial arts, math, chess, bicycling, swimming, etc., all these things are good and help us get the focus of our self, but they aren't the Holy Grail of Meaning. 

Two. We need self-awareness, AKA the Third Eye or metacognition so that we can make more intelligent and moral choices rather than being dragged down by the reptilian, primitive, irrational part of our brain. But this too falls short of meaning. 

Three. We need humility to learn from our mistakes so we can become stronger and wiser. Again, humility is great, but not the same as meaning. 

Four. We need a good job that uses our skills and makes us feel needed and pays us so we can buy stuff we want and feel secure and comfortable. This is good, too, but it isn't meaning. 

Five. We need reproductive success. This means finding a mate whom we find desirable and attractive and a complement to our existence. This is great, but it isn't meaning. 

Six. We need a sense of belonging and meaningful friendships. This too is great, but it is not meaning. 

Seven. We need free time to play and enjoy recreation as a counterbalance to our hard work. Again, this is a need, but it isn't meaning. 

Eight. We need moral character, the kind that compels us to have respect for others and ourselves and to have a reverence for life. In fact, we don't find meaning outside of ourselves. Meaning is born from our moral character. 

We can have all these 8 things and achieve a certain satisfaction in our growth, maturity, and success and still not have meaning or at least not the heroic kind evidenced by Viktor Frankl in his book. 

As a result, we can have the 8 Essential Things and go through life happy enough without having meaning. Our life is full enough based on our moral growth, our work, our love life, our friendships, and our human connections that we don't seek any meaning beyond this. 

However, some of us can attain the 8 Essential Things and still suffer, to some degree or other, the existential vacuum, the sense of emptiness and restlessness that "life is good but there must be something More."There is a sense of the Beyond, of Mystery, and Enchantment. 

Some people seek this More in religion. 

Others seek this More in creativity, such as writing or the arts. 

Others seek this More with drugs, LSD, mushrooms, marijuana, etc. 

Others say there is no More, that we are biological creatures who can be reduced to sexual and survival instincts. 

Viktor Frankl says there is meaning in terms of our moral position, which is that we must fight to help others at the expense of our own safety and convenience. This is a morality rooted at the heart of his religion. 

His religion states that we must fight to help others at the expense of our safety and convenience; otherwise, we will become self-preservational animals, losing our souls to our most primitive urges. The consequence of not following the moral dictate described by Frankl in his book is that we will suffer moral dissolution and the existential vacuum. 

The challenge is that throughout human history something like less than 1 percent of the human race have chosen to live as heroically as Viktor Frankl. 

Most of us pacify ourselves sufficiently with the 8 Essential Things but fall short of Meaning as described by Viktor Frankl. For Frankl, meaning is an absolute. For most people meaning is relative to the 8 Essential Things.  

What's the biggest weakness of Frankl Lite?

None of the basic needs, except moral character, are reliable. Frankl, who underwent the torture and humiliation of a concentration camp, has a message: Everything can be taken from you.

However, the kind of meaning Frankl develops in himself, the very kind of meaning he defines in his book, cannot be taken away.

Top Twenty Writing Errors 

According to Andrea A. Lunsford in The St. Martin’s Handbook, Eight Edition, there are 20 writing errors that merit “The Top 20.” 

One. Wrong word: Confusing one word for another.

Here's a list of wrong word usage.  

A full-bodied red wine compliments the Pasta Pomodoro. 

Compliment is a to say something nice about someone. "You look nice in that pumpkin polo shirt. Very nice pumpkin accents."

Complement is to complete or match well with something. "This full-bodied red wine complements the spaghetti." 

The BMW salesman excepted my counteroffer of 55K for the sports sedan. 

The word should be accepted. 

Kryptonite effects Superman in such a way that he loses his powers. 

Effect is a noun. Affect is a verb, so it should be the following: 

Kryptonite affects Superman in a such a way that he loses his powers. 

Confusing their and there

There superpowers were compromised by the Gamma rays. 

We need to use the possessive plural pronoun their. 

Two. Missing comma after an introductory phrase or clause

 

Terrified of slimy foods, Robert hid behind the restaurant’s dumpster. 

In spite of my aversion to rollercoasters, I attended the carnival with my family. 

Three. Incomplete documentation 

Noted dietician and nutritionist Mike Manderlin observes that, “Dieting is a mental illness.” 

It should read: 

Noted dietician and nutritionist Mike Manderlin observes that, “Dieting is a mental illness” (277). 

Four. Vague Pronoun Reference 

Focusing on the pecs during your Monday-Wednesday-Friday workouts is a way of giving you more time to work on your quads and glutes and specializing on the way they’re used in different exercises. 

Before Jennifer screamed at Brittany, she came to the conclusion that she was justified in stealing her boyfriend. 

Five. Spelling (including homonyms, words that have same spelling but different meanings) 

No one came forward to bare witness to the crime. 

No one came forward to bear witness to the crime. 

Every where we went, we saw fast food restaurants. 

Everywhere we went, we saw fast food restaurants. 

Love is a disease. It’s sickness derives from its power to intoxicate and create capricious, short-term infatuation. 

Its sickness derives from its power to intoxicate and create capricious, short-term infatuation. 

Six. Mechanical error with a quotation 

In his best-selling book Love Is a Virus from Outer Space, noted psychologist Michael M. Manderlin asserts that, “Falling in love is a form of madness for which there is no cure”. 

In his best selling book Love Is a Virus from Outer Space, noted psychologist Michael M. Manderlin asserts that, “Falling in love is a form of madness for which there is no cure.” 

In his best selling book Love Is a Virus from Outer Space, noted psychologist Michael M. Manderlin asserts that, “Falling in love is a form of madness for which there is no cure” (18). 

“It forever stuns me that people make life decisions based on something as fickle and capricious as love”, Michael Manderlin writes (22). 

“It forever stuns me that people make life decisions based on something as fickle and capricious as love,” Michael Manderlin writes (22). 

Seven. Unnecessary comma 

I need to workout when at home, and while taking vacations. 

You do however use a comma if the comma is between two independent clauses: 

I need to workout at home, and when I go on vacations, I bring my yoga mat to hotels. 

I need to workout every day, because I’m addicted to the exercise-induced dopamine. 

You do however use a comma after a dependent clause beginning with because: 

Because I’m addicted to exercise-induced dopamine, I need to workout everyday. 

Peaches, that are green, taste hideous. 

The above is an example of an independent clause with a essential information or restrictive information. Not all peaches taste hideous, only green ones. The meaning of the entire sentence needs the dependent clause so there are no commas. 

However, if the clause is additional information, the clause is called nonessential or nonrestrictive, and we do use commas: 

Peaches, which are on sale at Whole Foods, are my favorite fruit. 

Eight. Unnecessary or missing capitalization 

Some Traditional Chinese Medicines containing Ephedraremain legal.

We only use capital letters for proper nouns, proper adjectives, first words of sentences, important words in titles, along with certain words indicating directions and family relationships. 

Nine. Missing word 

The site foreman discriminated women and promoted men with less experience. 

The site foreman discriminated against women and promoted men with less experience. 

Chris’ behavior becomes bizarre that his family asks for help. 

Chris’ behavior becomes so bizarre that his family asks for help. 

Ten. Faulty sentence structure 

The information which high school athletes are presented with mainly includes information on what credits needed to graduate and thinking about the college which athletes are trying to play for, and apply. 

A sentence that starts out with one kind of structure and then changes to another kind can confuse readers. Make sure that each sentence contains a subject and a verb, that subjects and predicates make sense together, and that comparisons have clear meanings. When you join elements (such as subjects or verb phrases) with a coordinating conjunction, make sure that the elements have parallel structures. 

The reason I prefer yoga at home to the gym is because I prefer privacy. 

I prefer yoga at home to the gym because of privacy. 

11. Missing Comma with a Nonrestrictive Element 

Marina who was the president of the club was the first to speak. 

The clause who was the president of the club does not affect the basic meaning of the sentence: Marina was the first to speak. 

A nonrestrictive element gives information not essential to the basic meaning of the sentence. Use commas to set off a nonrestrictive element. 

12. Unnecessary Shift in Verb Tense 

Priya was watching the great blue heron. Then she slips and falls into the swamp. 

Verbs that shift from one tense to another with no clear reason can confuse readers. 

13. Missing Comma in a Compound Sentence

 

Meredith waited for Samir and her sister grew impatient. 

Without the comma, a reader may think at first that Meredith waited for both Samir and her sister. 

A compound sentence consists of two or more parts that could each stand alone as a sentence. When the parts are joined by a coordinating conjunction, use a comma before the conjunction to indicate a pause between the two thoughts. 

14. Unnecessary or Missing Apostrophe (including its/it's) 

Overambitious parents can be very harmful to a childs well-being. 

The car is lying on it's side in the ditch. Its a white 2004 Passat.

 

To make a noun possessive, add either an apostrophe and an s (Ed's book) or an apostrophe alone (the boys' gym). Do not use an apostrophe in the possessive pronouns ours, yours, and hers. Useits to mean belong to it; use it's only when you mean it is or it has. 

15. Fused (run-on) sentence 

Klee's paintings seem simple, they are very sophisticated. 

She doubted the value of medication she decided to try it once. 

A fused sentence (also called a run-on) joins clauses that could each stand alone as a sentence with no punctuation or words to link them. Fused sentences must be either divided into separate sentences or joined by adding words or punctuation. 

16. Comma Splice 

I was strongly attracted to her, she was beautiful and funny. 

We hated the meat loaf, the cafeteria served it every Friday. 

A comma splice occurs when only a comma separates clauses that could each stand alone as a sentence. To correct a comma splice, you can insert a semicolon or period, connect the clauses with a word such as and or because, or restructure the sentence. 

17. Lack of pronoun/antecedent agreement 

Every student must provide their own uniform. 

Pronouns must agree with their antecedents in gender (male or female) and in number (singular or plural). Many indefinite pronouns, such as everyone and each, are always singular. When a singular antecedent can refer to a man or woman, either rewrite the sentence to make the antecedent plural or to eliminate the pronoun, or use his or her, he or she, and so on. When antecedents are joined by or or nor, the pronoun must agree with the closer antecedent. A collection noun such as team can be either singular or plural, depending on whether the members are seen as a group or individuals. 

18. Poorly Integrated Quotation 

A 1970s study of what makes food appetizing "Once it became apparent that the steak was actually blue and the fries were green, some people became ill" (Schlosser 565).

Corrected

In a 1970s study about what makes food appetizing, we read, "Once it became apparent that the steak was actually blue and the fries were green, some people became ill" (Schlosser 565).  

"Dumpster diving has serious drawbacks as a way of life" (Eighner 383). Finding edible food is especially tricky.

Corrected

"Dumpster diving has serious drawbacks as a way of life," we read in Eighner's book (383). One of the drawbacks is that finding food can be especially difficult.  

Quotations should fit smoothly into the surrounding sentence structure. They should be linked clearly to the writing around them (usually with a signal phrase) rather than dropped abruptly into the writing. 

19. Missing or Unnecessary Hyphen 

This paper looks at fictional and real life examples. 

A compound adjective modifying a noun that follows it requires a hyphen. 

The buyers want to fix-up the house and resell it. 

A two-word verb should not be hyphenated. A compound adjective that appears before a noun needs a hyphen. However, be careful not to hyphenate two-word verbs or word groups that serve as subject complements. 

20. Sentence Fragment 

No subject 

Marie Antoinette spent huge sums of money on herself and her favorites. And helped to bring on the French Revolution. 

No complete verb 

The aluminum boat sitting on its trailer. 

Beginning with a subordinating word 

We returned to the drugstore. Where we waited for our buddies. 

A sentence fragment is part of a sentence that is written as if it were a complete sentence. Reading your draft out loud, backwards, sentence by sentence, will help you spot sentence fragments.