Thoughts on “Man’s search for meaning”?
I just finished Viktor Frankl's "Mans search for meaning", for those of you unfamiliar with it it is an autobiography of a psychiatrist who was sent to a nazi concentration camp and survived. He gives a first hand account of how people acted and reacted in such a place, and his own view of the world through such suffering and how he found meaning within his life.
This sentence made me think of Alan Watts when reading the book, "I consider it a dangerous misconception of mental hygiene to assume that what man needs in the first place is equilibrium, or as it is called "homeostasis", ie a tensionless state. What man actually needs is not a tensionless state but rather the striving and struggling for a worthwhile goal, a freely chosen task"
One of his main arguments is that man needs a future goal to live, those without future goals succumbed to lifelessness, they had to force their minds to think about the future in order to survive in such a place. For him it was the thought of reuniting with his wife and finishing his book, those prisoners who had no future goals gave up and died either due to suicide or disease/malnutrition. He does note that his survival was dependent on pure luck and circumstance as well, but makes strong arguments for the fact that man needs to have faith in the future to have meaning in his life, "Prisoner who lost faith in the future was doomed".
I know Alan Watts talks about living in the present and how the present is the only thing that exists, but in a place such as a concentration camp the mental escape of dreaming about a future was often the only thing that kept them going. Watts also discussed the meaninglessness of life (in a positive way) and the tension in human minds, whereas Frankl's main argument was that man needs a meaning and 'tension' to survive and be happy.
Alan Watts also talks about how our choices are not necessarily our own, they spring up spontaneously in the mind, however Frankl argues that the last freedom any man has is in choosing how to react to a certain set of circumstances, ie walking into the gas chamber with his head held high, suffering with dignity, sharing his last piece of bread while starving. Frankl places a lot of importance on the fact that man choses how he may act, and it is *not* predetermined by anything, it is a freedom we are all granted.
Idk, id love to hear other people’s thoughts if they’ve read this book and Watts’ books. I’ll admit it’s been awhile since i read AW but i have read many. Or even opinions if you haven’t read this book, i just think i probably didn’t sum it up well enough haha