REACTION TO VICTOR FRANKL’S MAN’S SEARCH FOR MEANING
Frankl attains as high a level of humanism in his writing as one would think possible of any scientist. His psychology is based on empiricism. His experiences as a prisoner in a Nazi concentration camp, stripped of everything but his bare existence, led him to explore the ultimate sense of meaning in human life. In own privileged western world we don’t have to struggle for life and its essentials, like food. Furthermore, there is plenty to keep us busy, whether it be work or other forms of entertainment. In such an environment it is easy to forget or procrastinate in the search for life’s meaning. In Frankl’s account, the search for meaning had life-and-death implications, like the need for food and water.
Having formed a theory so based on experience, Frankl is much less schematic or cerebral than even the most humanistic of psychologists. Some of his conclusions are not unlike those of Abraham Maslow and Erich Fromm. This is clear in the importance all three give to transcendence. He asserts that “the more one forgets himself…the more human he is and the more he actualizes himself” (133). This assertion reminds one of Maslow’s definitions of “peak experiences” as those of transcendence. Maslow claims that it is possible to learn from such experiences in order to become more conscious of being. This idea firmly correlates with Frankl’s.
The main concern for mankind is fulfilling a meaning. It is in this point that Frankl’s humanism is most firmly established. Contrary to Freud’s rather mechanistic beliefs, this kind of meaning goes beyond the mere satisfaction of drives and instincts, reconciling the conflicting claims of id, ego and superego, or adaptation and adjustment to society and...