Chapter 13
Is Pondering the “Meaning of Life” a Pastime for the Privileged?
On one hand, an argument could be made that my college students should consider “the meaning of life” during the short period they’ll have the time to approach it with any intellectual rigor. Most will move on to the “business of life” after college without the time, energy, or interest for such intellectual pursuits.
Is philosophy a privileged pastime? Is it an indulgence? Or as Ed writes: “At worst I would say having time to ponder philosophy is elitist, or something the majority of humanity does not have the time to worry about that much.”
So what is Man’s Search for Meaning then? A treatise crucial for restoring sanity to the human race? Or another philosophical polemic to be combed over by intellectual elites? My agnosticism on the issue is yet more evidence that I am not worthy of teaching Frankl’s masterpiece.
I agree insofar as I'm an advocate of Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, and if the lower "subsistence" needs (physiological, safety, belonging, esteem) aren't met, the higher "being" needs (actualization and transcendence) don't kick in. Philosophy is generally within the umbrella of the being needs.
Ken Wilber, who uses a different but complementary system from Maslow's, says that the lower needs/levels of consciousness are more fundamental and the higher needs/levels are more meaningful. I tend to agree. Both poles are valid aspects of the human experience but quite different.
Posted by: jonnybardo | 02/14/2014 at 02:08 PM