What do you think?
Rate this book
Das Leiden am sinnlosen Leben. Psychotherapie für heute
=The trials of life meaningless. Psychotherapy for today
Además de una psicología «profunda» existe también una psicología «elevada». Esta última es la que nos quiere presentar Frankl en esta obra: la que incluye en su campo de visión la voluntad de sentido.
Cada época tiene sus neurosis y cada tiempo necesita su psicoterapia. Hoy nos enfrentamos con una frustración existencial cargada de una falta de sentido y de un gran sentimiento de vacío. La sociedad de la opulencia sólo satisface necesidades, pero no la voluntad de sentido. La tendencia radical del hombre busca el sentido de la vida y pretende llenarlo de contenido.
Este breve volumen ofrece al lector un contenido de denso y, al propio tiempo, resplandeciente humanismo, copiosamente documentado, con juicios críticos tan considerados, que merece una atenta lectura.
Además de una psicología «profunda» existe también una psicología «elevada». Esta última es la que nos quiere presentar Frankl en esta obra: la que incluye en su campo de visión la voluntad de sentido.
Cada época tiene sus neurosis y cada tiempo necesita su psicoterapia. Hoy nos enfrentamos con una frustración existencial cargada de una falta de sentido y de un gran sentimiento de vacío. La sociedad de la opulencia sólo satisface necesidades, pero no la voluntad de sentido. La tendencia radical del hombre busca el sentido de la vida y pretende llenarlo de contenido.
Este breve volumen ofrece al lector un contenido de denso y, al propio tiempo, resplandeciente humanismo, copiosamente documentado, con juicios críticos tan considerados, que merece una atenta lectura.
128 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1989
125 people are currently reading
1929 people want to read
About the author
Viktor E. Frankl
170 books8,072 followersViktor Emil Frankl was an Austrian neurologist, psychologist, philosopher, and Holocaust survivor, who founded logotherapy, a school of psychotherapy that describes a search for a life's meaning as the central human motivational force. Logotherapy is part of existential and humanistic psychology theories.
Logotherapy was promoted as the third school of Viennese Psychotherapy, after those established by Sigmund Freud and Alfred Adler.
Frankl published 39 books. The autobiographical Man's Search for Meaning, a best-selling book, is based on his experiences in various Nazi concentration camps.
Logotherapy was promoted as the third school of Viennese Psychotherapy, after those established by Sigmund Freud and Alfred Adler.
Frankl published 39 books. The autobiographical Man's Search for Meaning, a best-selling book, is based on his experiences in various Nazi concentration camps.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 63 reviews
October 9, 2025
Nazi toplama kamplarından kurtulan Victor Frankl “İnsanın Anlam Arayışı” kitabında oralarda yaşadıklarını anlatır ve vahşetten kurtulmasının dayanağı olduğuna inandığı “logoterapi” yönteminden bahseder, işte buna dair merakımı gidermek için bu kitabı okudum. Frankl logoterapinin insanın hayatının anlamını bulmasına yardımcı olduğunu söylüyor. Logoterapinin insanı dürtüleri ve içgüdülerini tatmin etmekten ziyade, değerleri gerçekleştirmek, id-ego-süperegonun birbirleriyle çatışan talepleri karşısında uzlaşmacı davranmak, topluma ve çevreye alışmak ve uyum sağlamak olan bir varlık olarak görmesiyle psikanalizden ayrıldığını vurguluyor. Yani Freud’un bastırılmış cinsellik, haz duygusu istencinin ve Adler’in güç istencinin yerine “anlam istenci” konulmasının gerekliliğini ileri sürüyor.
Varoluşu çok önemseyen nöropsikiyatrist yazar insanın varoluş biçimi, anlamı ve anlam bulma çabası konularında dini anlam taşımayan “ruhsal” boyutu öne çıkarmaktadır. Çünkü insanın somatik (vücut, organlar), zihinsel (akıl, zeka vb) ve ruhsal boyutu olduğuna inanmaktadır. Varoluşçu kadar varoluşçuluk olduğunu ironik olarak belirten Frankl, kendisini, çok saygı duyduğu ama farklı düşündüğü Adler ve Freud’un tamamlayıcısı olarak görmektedir. Yazarın varoluşsal nevroz- kollektif nevroz dediği nihilizme kadar giden hayatın ve varlığının anlamsızlığının nedenini varoluşsal engellemelere bağlamakta, çözüm için logoterapiyi önermektedir.
Sonuçta eksikliklerine, benim mantığıma ters gelen düşüncelerine karşın çok yararlandım. Kitap akademik bir kitap sayılabilir Bu bilgilerin toplama kampı deneyimi yaşamış, ölüm ile arasında ince bir çizgi olan ve etrafında çaresiz ve kötülüğün pençesinde olan yüzlerce insan görmüş bir bilim insanının yazdığını dikkate alarak okudum.
Kişisel kanım biraz bilgi sahibi olduğum Freud, daha az bildiğim Adler ve Jung ve son olarak V. Frankl bir arada değerlendirilmeli, hepsinden polen toplayıp bal yapmak en iyisi olur.
Çeviri iyi değil bu olumsuzluğa rağmen, konuya ilgi duyanlara öneririm.
Varoluşu çok önemseyen nöropsikiyatrist yazar insanın varoluş biçimi, anlamı ve anlam bulma çabası konularında dini anlam taşımayan “ruhsal” boyutu öne çıkarmaktadır. Çünkü insanın somatik (vücut, organlar), zihinsel (akıl, zeka vb) ve ruhsal boyutu olduğuna inanmaktadır. Varoluşçu kadar varoluşçuluk olduğunu ironik olarak belirten Frankl, kendisini, çok saygı duyduğu ama farklı düşündüğü Adler ve Freud’un tamamlayıcısı olarak görmektedir. Yazarın varoluşsal nevroz- kollektif nevroz dediği nihilizme kadar giden hayatın ve varlığının anlamsızlığının nedenini varoluşsal engellemelere bağlamakta, çözüm için logoterapiyi önermektedir.
Sonuçta eksikliklerine, benim mantığıma ters gelen düşüncelerine karşın çok yararlandım. Kitap akademik bir kitap sayılabilir Bu bilgilerin toplama kampı deneyimi yaşamış, ölüm ile arasında ince bir çizgi olan ve etrafında çaresiz ve kötülüğün pençesinde olan yüzlerce insan görmüş bir bilim insanının yazdığını dikkate alarak okudum.
Kişisel kanım biraz bilgi sahibi olduğum Freud, daha az bildiğim Adler ve Jung ve son olarak V. Frankl bir arada değerlendirilmeli, hepsinden polen toplayıp bal yapmak en iyisi olur.
Çeviri iyi değil bu olumsuzluğa rağmen, konuya ilgi duyanlara öneririm.
November 22, 2014
An excellent description of Logotherapy by its main proponent and the man of courage for many of us mortals. My notes follow.
Often people complain about a sense of futility and emptiness, a feeling of meaninglessness, which can be described as the existential vacuum.
Unlike the animal, man is no longer told by his instincts as to what he must do. And in contrast to former times, he is no longer told by traditions and values what he should do. Now, knowing neither what he must do nor what he should do. He sometimes does not even know what it is that he basically wishes to do. Instead, he gets to wish to do what other people do (conformity) or he does what other people wish him to do (totalitarianism).
Being human means relating and being directed to something or someone other than oneself. Individuals aspire toward the fulfilment of values, the achievement of a meaningful life. Man is led and guided in his search for meaning by his conscience.
Meaning must be found; it cannot be given. And it must be found by oneself. To give meaning would amount to moralising.
The existence is authentic only to the extent to which it points to something that is not itself. Being human cannot be its own meaning. Human being fades away unless it commits itself to some freely chosen meaning.
Logos is a Greek word which means “meaning”. Logotherapy focuses on the meaning of human existence as well as on man’s search for such a meaning. This striving to find a meaning in one’s life is, according to logotherapy, regarded as the primary motivational force in man.
Insofar as logotherapy is concerned, its concept of man is based on 3 pillars:
1. Freedom of will,
2. Will to meaning, and
3. Meaning of life.
What is actually man’s concern is not to fulfil himself or to actualise himself but to fulfil meaning and to realise value.
Life can be made meaningful in a threefold way:
1. Through what we give to life (in terms of our creative works)
2. By what we take from the world (in terms of our experiencing values, be it in nature, or in culture)
3. Through the stand we take toward a fate we no longer can change (an incurable disease, or the like.
Man is not spared facing his human condition which includes the tragic triad of human existence, namely, pain, death and guilt.
Viktor Frankl mentions his dilemma in a concentration camp when faced with a man and a woman who were close to suicide; both had told him the same thing – that they expected nothing more from life. His therapy was to achieve a kind of Copernican switch by asking both fellow prisoners whether the question was really what we expect from life or, rather, was it not what life was expecting from us. He suggested that life was awaiting something from them. In fact the woman was being awaited by her child abroad and the man by a series of books which he had begun to write but had not yet finished.
Often people complain about a sense of futility and emptiness, a feeling of meaninglessness, which can be described as the existential vacuum.
Unlike the animal, man is no longer told by his instincts as to what he must do. And in contrast to former times, he is no longer told by traditions and values what he should do. Now, knowing neither what he must do nor what he should do. He sometimes does not even know what it is that he basically wishes to do. Instead, he gets to wish to do what other people do (conformity) or he does what other people wish him to do (totalitarianism).
Being human means relating and being directed to something or someone other than oneself. Individuals aspire toward the fulfilment of values, the achievement of a meaningful life. Man is led and guided in his search for meaning by his conscience.
Meaning must be found; it cannot be given. And it must be found by oneself. To give meaning would amount to moralising.
The existence is authentic only to the extent to which it points to something that is not itself. Being human cannot be its own meaning. Human being fades away unless it commits itself to some freely chosen meaning.
Logos is a Greek word which means “meaning”. Logotherapy focuses on the meaning of human existence as well as on man’s search for such a meaning. This striving to find a meaning in one’s life is, according to logotherapy, regarded as the primary motivational force in man.
Insofar as logotherapy is concerned, its concept of man is based on 3 pillars:
1. Freedom of will,
2. Will to meaning, and
3. Meaning of life.
What is actually man’s concern is not to fulfil himself or to actualise himself but to fulfil meaning and to realise value.
Life can be made meaningful in a threefold way:
1. Through what we give to life (in terms of our creative works)
2. By what we take from the world (in terms of our experiencing values, be it in nature, or in culture)
3. Through the stand we take toward a fate we no longer can change (an incurable disease, or the like.
Man is not spared facing his human condition which includes the tragic triad of human existence, namely, pain, death and guilt.
Viktor Frankl mentions his dilemma in a concentration camp when faced with a man and a woman who were close to suicide; both had told him the same thing – that they expected nothing more from life. His therapy was to achieve a kind of Copernican switch by asking both fellow prisoners whether the question was really what we expect from life or, rather, was it not what life was expecting from us. He suggested that life was awaiting something from them. In fact the woman was being awaited by her child abroad and the man by a series of books which he had begun to write but had not yet finished.
July 12, 2025
É um livro que destaca a relevância da compreensão da condição humana, auto-responsabilidade e a capacidade de encontrar significado na vida. Infelizmente, sua leitura não é de fácil compreensão. É demasiado técnico!
May 17, 2024
*Reseña pendiente*
March 2, 2018
O livro é curto; traz conceitos básicos sobre a logoterapia, narra alguns casos e algumas reflexões de Viktor. Não é um livro introdutório à psicologia, são utilizados termos bastante específicos da área e cabe ao leitor conhecê-los de antemão, ou então pesquisar durante a leitura.
"Quando me perguntam como explicar o advento desse vazio existencial, cuido então de oferecer a seguinte fórmula abreviada: em contraposição ao animal, os instintos não dizem ao homem o que ele tem de fazer e, diferentemente do homem do passado, o homem de hoje não tem mais a tradição que lhe diga o que deve fazer. Não sabendo o que tem e tampouco o que deve fazer, mutas vezes já não sabe mais o que, no fundo, quer. Assim, só quer o que os outros fazem - conformismo! Ou só faz o que os outros querem que faça - totalitarismo."
"Vieram-me então à mente as palavras de Kierkegaard: "Mesmo se a loucura me surgisse aos olhos em seu traje de bufão, sempre posso salvar a minha alma, se triunfa em mim o meu amor para com Deus."
"Quando me perguntam como explicar o advento desse vazio existencial, cuido então de oferecer a seguinte fórmula abreviada: em contraposição ao animal, os instintos não dizem ao homem o que ele tem de fazer e, diferentemente do homem do passado, o homem de hoje não tem mais a tradição que lhe diga o que deve fazer. Não sabendo o que tem e tampouco o que deve fazer, mutas vezes já não sabe mais o que, no fundo, quer. Assim, só quer o que os outros fazem - conformismo! Ou só faz o que os outros querem que faça - totalitarismo."
"Vieram-me então à mente as palavras de Kierkegaard: "Mesmo se a loucura me surgisse aos olhos em seu traje de bufão, sempre posso salvar a minha alma, se triunfa em mim o meu amor para com Deus."
February 27, 2023
Un testo prezioso, arricchito da un'ottima prefazione.
Nonostante non sia uno degli scritti principali di Frankl, questo saggio racchiude gran parte del suo pensiero.
È una raccolta che si presenta come introduzione alla logoterapia, "un approccio psicoterapeutico teorizzato da Viktor Frankl che si pone, come obiettivo primario, la riscoperta del significato (logos) dell'esistenza dell'essere umano".
Al di là della indubbia preparazione dell'autore in ambito psichiatrico e psicoterapico, la forza del suo messaggio deriva dalla sua storia personale: un internato ad Auschwitz che parla del significato della vita.
“Nessuna situazione della vita è realmente priva di significato. Questo vuol dire che gli stessi elementi che apparentemente sembrano segnati dalla negatività, com’è il caso della tragica triade dell’esistenza umana, formata dalla sofferenza, dalla colpa e dalla morte, possono essere trasformati in una conquista in un’autentica prestazione a patto che si assumano nei loro confronti un atteggiamento è un’impostazione giusti. La società del benessere porta con sé un aumento di tempo libero che offrirebbe la possibilità di una realizzazione della vita in maniera molto significativa. In realtà però esso lascia emergere ancora più il vuoto esistenziale come noi psichiatri possiamo osservare nella sempre più frequente nevrosi della domenica.”
Frankl introduce il concetto di intenzione paradossa: una tecnica terapeutica che mira alla contraddizione e all’assurdo. L’obiettivo di questo strumento è innescare nel paziente atteggiamenti che in altre occasioni tenderebbe a evitare, e che si rivelano essere il nucleo del suo malessere e del suo disagio. In questi casi, la contraddittorietà di questo strumento può rivelarsi estremamente utile.
Questa tecnica fa sì che la persona affetta da un disturbo d’ansia provi ansia nel momento presente; che la persona con atteggiamenti compulsivi e manie le metta in atto; che la persona con disturbi del sonno riveda tutte le sue paure così da non dormire quando va a letto.
I pazienti smettono di eludere o controllare i sintomi del loro disturbo. Vengono motivati a mostrarli deliberatamente e in maniera volutamente esagerata.
Di nuovo Frankl, propone il significato come stella polare della vita umana, di fronte alla quale tutto il resto sbiadisce:
"Il significato è qualcosa da scoprire, non da creare. N0n si possono creare dei significati soggettivi dei sentimenti di significato o di assoluta mancanza di senso. E' comprensibile come l'uomo che non è più in grado di trovare nella sua vita un significato e tanto meno di inventarlo, fuggendo dinanzi al senso di assurdità e di mancanza di significato (...).
Con quale diritto affermiamo che la vita non cessa mai per nessuno di conservare un significato? Ciò si fonda sul fatto che l'uomo è sempre in grado di trasformare in prestazione una situazione che umanamente sembra senza via d'uscita. Ecco perché anche la sofferenza contiene una possibilità di significato. Nel realizzare un significato l'uomo realizza se stesso."
“Da tali interventi le altre pazienti presenti appresero che poco nella vita importa se essa sia stata piena di piacere o di sofferenza ciò che importa è che sia stata significativa (...) Ritengo sia specificatamente umano l’interrogativo circa il senso della vita e che appartenga unicamente all’essere uomo la possibilità di interrogarsi circa tale significato.”
“In base alla sua volontà di significato l’uomo è orientato alla ricerca e alla realizzazione di significati, ma anche all’incontro con un altro essere umano come un tu, amandolo. Orbene sia la realizzazione che l’incontro offrono all’uomo un motivo per la felicità e per il piacere. Nel nevrotico tale tensione primaria viene orientata verso la ricerca diretta della felicità verso la volontà di piacere. Invece di rimanere ciò che deve essere ossia un effetto, il piacere diviene l’oggetto di un’intenzione forzata, di un’iperintenzione, cui è strettamente legata un’ iperriflessione. A questo punto il piacere diviene unico contenuto è oggetto di attenzione. Ma nella misura in cui il nevrotico si preoccupa del piacere perde di vista il motivo per il piacere: in tal modo l’effetto piacere non può più sopraggiungere.”
Molto belli i tre interrogativi esistenziali di origine ebraica che l'autore presenta:
“Se non lo faccio io chi lo farà? Se non lo faccio adesso quando lo farò? Se lo faccio per me stesso chi sono io?
Nel primo interrogativo è presente la concezione della persona come esistenza insostituibile unica al singolare ricca di potenzialità e di possibilità da scoprire e da realizzare in forma autonoma originale e dinamica. La seconda domanda richiama l’attimo fuggente in cui si vive e in cui si è chiamati a realizzare un compito. La terza domanda sottolinea con notevole efficacia la forza motivazionale primaria definita da Frankl la volontà di significato. Quando trascende se stesso e si orienta verso un compito riconosciuto come significativo l’uomo si ritrova si realizza quando invece è preoccupato di se stesso e rende scopo ciò che deve essere un effetto laterale l’uomo scivola insensibilmente ma inevitabilmente nell’autodistruzione e naufraga nel solipsismo più radicale.”
“nell’uomo incontriamo un fenomeno fondamentalmente antropologico: l’autotrascendenza dell’esistenza umana! Intendo riferirmi al fatto che essere uomo vuol dire andare verso qualcosa aldilà di se stesso qualcosa che non è se stesso qualcuno o qualcosa: un significato da realizzare o un altro essere umano da incontrare nell’amore.l’uomo realizza se stesso nel servire una cosa o nell’amare una persona. Quanto più adempie il suo compito quanto più si dona il suo partner, tanto più è uomo tanto più diventa se stesso. Egli può realizzarsi solo nella misura in cui si dimentica.”
Infine, Frankl si focalizza sui disturbi di ansia e di panico in generale, cercando di sviscerare i meccanismi che si nascondo dietro queste manifestazioni:
“Che cosa provoca l’insorgere di questa angoscia dell’ansia? Si tratta con molta frequenza dell’angoscia del paziente di fronte all’angoscia stessa: egli teme le possibili conseguenze per la salute derivante dalla sua agitazione angosciosa. Tale paura della paura lo porta a fuggire la paura: paradossalmente li cercherà di sfuggire alla paura restando in casa. Abbiamo in effetti a che fare con tipo di reazione agorafobica.”
Nonostante non sia uno degli scritti principali di Frankl, questo saggio racchiude gran parte del suo pensiero.
È una raccolta che si presenta come introduzione alla logoterapia, "un approccio psicoterapeutico teorizzato da Viktor Frankl che si pone, come obiettivo primario, la riscoperta del significato (logos) dell'esistenza dell'essere umano".
Al di là della indubbia preparazione dell'autore in ambito psichiatrico e psicoterapico, la forza del suo messaggio deriva dalla sua storia personale: un internato ad Auschwitz che parla del significato della vita.
“Nessuna situazione della vita è realmente priva di significato. Questo vuol dire che gli stessi elementi che apparentemente sembrano segnati dalla negatività, com’è il caso della tragica triade dell’esistenza umana, formata dalla sofferenza, dalla colpa e dalla morte, possono essere trasformati in una conquista in un’autentica prestazione a patto che si assumano nei loro confronti un atteggiamento è un’impostazione giusti. La società del benessere porta con sé un aumento di tempo libero che offrirebbe la possibilità di una realizzazione della vita in maniera molto significativa. In realtà però esso lascia emergere ancora più il vuoto esistenziale come noi psichiatri possiamo osservare nella sempre più frequente nevrosi della domenica.”
Frankl introduce il concetto di intenzione paradossa: una tecnica terapeutica che mira alla contraddizione e all’assurdo. L’obiettivo di questo strumento è innescare nel paziente atteggiamenti che in altre occasioni tenderebbe a evitare, e che si rivelano essere il nucleo del suo malessere e del suo disagio. In questi casi, la contraddittorietà di questo strumento può rivelarsi estremamente utile.
Questa tecnica fa sì che la persona affetta da un disturbo d’ansia provi ansia nel momento presente; che la persona con atteggiamenti compulsivi e manie le metta in atto; che la persona con disturbi del sonno riveda tutte le sue paure così da non dormire quando va a letto.
I pazienti smettono di eludere o controllare i sintomi del loro disturbo. Vengono motivati a mostrarli deliberatamente e in maniera volutamente esagerata.
Di nuovo Frankl, propone il significato come stella polare della vita umana, di fronte alla quale tutto il resto sbiadisce:
"Il significato è qualcosa da scoprire, non da creare. N0n si possono creare dei significati soggettivi dei sentimenti di significato o di assoluta mancanza di senso. E' comprensibile come l'uomo che non è più in grado di trovare nella sua vita un significato e tanto meno di inventarlo, fuggendo dinanzi al senso di assurdità e di mancanza di significato (...).
Con quale diritto affermiamo che la vita non cessa mai per nessuno di conservare un significato? Ciò si fonda sul fatto che l'uomo è sempre in grado di trasformare in prestazione una situazione che umanamente sembra senza via d'uscita. Ecco perché anche la sofferenza contiene una possibilità di significato. Nel realizzare un significato l'uomo realizza se stesso."
“Da tali interventi le altre pazienti presenti appresero che poco nella vita importa se essa sia stata piena di piacere o di sofferenza ciò che importa è che sia stata significativa (...) Ritengo sia specificatamente umano l’interrogativo circa il senso della vita e che appartenga unicamente all’essere uomo la possibilità di interrogarsi circa tale significato.”
“In base alla sua volontà di significato l’uomo è orientato alla ricerca e alla realizzazione di significati, ma anche all’incontro con un altro essere umano come un tu, amandolo. Orbene sia la realizzazione che l’incontro offrono all’uomo un motivo per la felicità e per il piacere. Nel nevrotico tale tensione primaria viene orientata verso la ricerca diretta della felicità verso la volontà di piacere. Invece di rimanere ciò che deve essere ossia un effetto, il piacere diviene l’oggetto di un’intenzione forzata, di un’iperintenzione, cui è strettamente legata un’ iperriflessione. A questo punto il piacere diviene unico contenuto è oggetto di attenzione. Ma nella misura in cui il nevrotico si preoccupa del piacere perde di vista il motivo per il piacere: in tal modo l’effetto piacere non può più sopraggiungere.”
Molto belli i tre interrogativi esistenziali di origine ebraica che l'autore presenta:
“Se non lo faccio io chi lo farà? Se non lo faccio adesso quando lo farò? Se lo faccio per me stesso chi sono io?
Nel primo interrogativo è presente la concezione della persona come esistenza insostituibile unica al singolare ricca di potenzialità e di possibilità da scoprire e da realizzare in forma autonoma originale e dinamica. La seconda domanda richiama l’attimo fuggente in cui si vive e in cui si è chiamati a realizzare un compito. La terza domanda sottolinea con notevole efficacia la forza motivazionale primaria definita da Frankl la volontà di significato. Quando trascende se stesso e si orienta verso un compito riconosciuto come significativo l’uomo si ritrova si realizza quando invece è preoccupato di se stesso e rende scopo ciò che deve essere un effetto laterale l’uomo scivola insensibilmente ma inevitabilmente nell’autodistruzione e naufraga nel solipsismo più radicale.”
“nell’uomo incontriamo un fenomeno fondamentalmente antropologico: l’autotrascendenza dell’esistenza umana! Intendo riferirmi al fatto che essere uomo vuol dire andare verso qualcosa aldilà di se stesso qualcosa che non è se stesso qualcuno o qualcosa: un significato da realizzare o un altro essere umano da incontrare nell’amore.l’uomo realizza se stesso nel servire una cosa o nell’amare una persona. Quanto più adempie il suo compito quanto più si dona il suo partner, tanto più è uomo tanto più diventa se stesso. Egli può realizzarsi solo nella misura in cui si dimentica.”
Infine, Frankl si focalizza sui disturbi di ansia e di panico in generale, cercando di sviscerare i meccanismi che si nascondo dietro queste manifestazioni:
“Che cosa provoca l’insorgere di questa angoscia dell’ansia? Si tratta con molta frequenza dell’angoscia del paziente di fronte all’angoscia stessa: egli teme le possibili conseguenze per la salute derivante dalla sua agitazione angosciosa. Tale paura della paura lo porta a fuggire la paura: paradossalmente li cercherà di sfuggire alla paura restando in casa. Abbiamo in effetti a che fare con tipo di reazione agorafobica.”
November 22, 2020
очень интересно! советую.
March 23, 2023
"Sólo una conciencia despierta da al hombre capacidad de resistencia, de modo que ni se pliega al conformismo ni se inclina ante el totalitarismo". ▪️ Recopilatorio breve de textos de Viktor Frankl en diferentes contextos y conferencias. Los pensamientos aquí expuestos giran en torno a la cuestión del sentido, temática principal en su obra y terapia. Esta vez nos habla de temas como el suicido, las disfunciones sexuales, la religión, la crítica a la psicodinámica y sobretodo el análisis de los problemas modernos derivados de la sociedad de masas y estímulos tecnológicos. Para Frankl los retos que se nos plantean como sociedad contemporánea y como terapeutas están ahora más que nunca relacionados con los problemas de base existencial. ▪️ Lo que me ocurre con este autor es que me resulta más inspirador que tal vez práctico y/o empírico (que también, pero en menor medida). La función de sus escritos y de la logoterapia creo que puede funcionar como complemento reflexivo en relación a otras técnicas. Él siempre buscó la humanización de la psicoterapia tratando de romper con el rol del psicoanálisis donde la relación paciente-terapeuta es más distante en su esencia y donde, como bien explica, parece que sea una única visión e interpretación la que cada uno según su escuela es capaz de leer en las palabras de otro y no en la evidencia, humildad e investigación. La obra de Viktor Frankl se acerca mucho a la filosofía e incluso sin pretensión de entrar a fondo en temas teológicos también los acaba tratando. Como bien expresa, son a menudo los pacientes los que llevan los temas existenciales a la medicina. El médico, por su parte, no debe olvidar que su misión no es solo curar si no también consolar. 🌿
November 11, 2017
Frankl siempre será mi inspiración.
October 28, 2024
3 yıldız vermis mesela. bulundugum ortamda bu kitap yerilecek, masayı terketmem terkettiririm. daha bi insandan ne beklenir, ne yazsın bu adam.
April 21, 2018
V dnešnej dobe sú ľudia konfrontovaní s existenciálnou frustráciou. Ľudia prežívajú pocit straty zmyslu, pocit vnútorného prázdna, tzv. existenciálneho vákuua.
A aj tí, čo dosiahli brilantnú kariéru a žijú navonok usporiadaný a šťastný život. No i tí, ktorí nemajú uspokojené základné potreby: chorí chcú byť zdraví a chudobní chcú byť bohatými, ale to len preto, aby mohli potom žiť zmysluplný život, aby mohli naplniť zmysel svojho života.
Takže frustrácia nižších potrieb ako aj ich uspokojenie (nadbytok) vyvoláva otázku zmyslu. Mať zmysel v živote je teda primárnou motiváciou človeka aj v nedostatku aj v nadbytku.
Prečo ale vzniká toto vnútorné prázdno v človeku?
Na rozdiel od zvieraťa, človek nemá žiadne inštinkty, ktoré by mu automaticky prikazovali, čo má robiť. Taktiež narozdiel od minulých čias, dnešný človek už nemá tradície, ktoré by mu určovali, čo musí robiť.
Teda pretože nevie, čo má robiť, ani čo musí, zdá sa, že často už presne nevie, čo v podstate chce.
Žijeme v spoločnosti nadbytku a sme zaplavení podnetmi z masmédií. Ak nechceme zahynúť v tomto prúde, musíme sa naučiť rozlišovať, čo je podstatné a čo nie, čo má zmysel a čo nie, za čo niesť zodpovednosť a za čo nie.
Spoločnosť nadbytku prináša nadbytok voľného ćasu, ktorý síce ponúka príležitosť na uskutočňovanie zmysluplného života, no v skutočnosti však dáva ešte viac priestoru existencionálnemu vákuu. Príkladom je tzv. nedeľná neuróza . Výskumy potvrdzujú, že čoraz viac ľudí sa sťažuje, že nevedia čo s voľným časom v nedeľu. Práve výdobytky techniky a 7 desaťročí mieru, umožnili ľuďom luxus, aby sme nemuseli všetky naše schopnosti použiť na boj o život, o holé prežitie. Rozvinuli sme štát blahobytu, no nevieme čo s voľným časom...
Každý deň, každá hodina čakajú s novým zmyslom a na každého človeka čaká istý zmysel, úloha ktorú mu predostrel Život, aby ju naplnil, tak prebuďme v sebe život a tvorme, milujme, poznávajme... Usilujme sa o zmysluplný život! (a mnoho iného nájdete v tejto knižke)
A aj tí, čo dosiahli brilantnú kariéru a žijú navonok usporiadaný a šťastný život. No i tí, ktorí nemajú uspokojené základné potreby: chorí chcú byť zdraví a chudobní chcú byť bohatými, ale to len preto, aby mohli potom žiť zmysluplný život, aby mohli naplniť zmysel svojho života.
Takže frustrácia nižších potrieb ako aj ich uspokojenie (nadbytok) vyvoláva otázku zmyslu. Mať zmysel v živote je teda primárnou motiváciou človeka aj v nedostatku aj v nadbytku.
Prečo ale vzniká toto vnútorné prázdno v človeku?
Na rozdiel od zvieraťa, človek nemá žiadne inštinkty, ktoré by mu automaticky prikazovali, čo má robiť. Taktiež narozdiel od minulých čias, dnešný človek už nemá tradície, ktoré by mu určovali, čo musí robiť.
Teda pretože nevie, čo má robiť, ani čo musí, zdá sa, že často už presne nevie, čo v podstate chce.
Žijeme v spoločnosti nadbytku a sme zaplavení podnetmi z masmédií. Ak nechceme zahynúť v tomto prúde, musíme sa naučiť rozlišovať, čo je podstatné a čo nie, čo má zmysel a čo nie, za čo niesť zodpovednosť a za čo nie.
Spoločnosť nadbytku prináša nadbytok voľného ćasu, ktorý síce ponúka príležitosť na uskutočňovanie zmysluplného života, no v skutočnosti však dáva ešte viac priestoru existencionálnemu vákuu. Príkladom je tzv. nedeľná neuróza . Výskumy potvrdzujú, že čoraz viac ľudí sa sťažuje, že nevedia čo s voľným časom v nedeľu. Práve výdobytky techniky a 7 desaťročí mieru, umožnili ľuďom luxus, aby sme nemuseli všetky naše schopnosti použiť na boj o život, o holé prežitie. Rozvinuli sme štát blahobytu, no nevieme čo s voľným časom...
Každý deň, každá hodina čakajú s novým zmyslom a na každého človeka čaká istý zmysel, úloha ktorú mu predostrel Život, aby ju naplnil, tak prebuďme v sebe život a tvorme, milujme, poznávajme... Usilujme sa o zmysluplný život! (a mnoho iného nájdete v tejto knižke)
June 15, 2019
By far the most insightful book about psychotherapy I've read.
The book itself is pretty short, yet very dense with information, sometimes even difficult to read. But how much more rewarding it is, when terrifyingly strong ideas pop up from the field of letters like whales above a calm ocean.
Many of the ideas in the book are also found in book Man's search for meaning (in the second part of the book) from the same author.
It is striking how negatively (and rightfully so) the author looks at psychoanalysis and psychotherapy of the time. Frankly speaking, not much has changed since the book was written in 1977, except for psychopharmaceutics. The author explains that understanding the problem does not necessarily helps solving it. Similarly, a smoker understands that cigarettes might be killing him, but it still does not make quitting easier for him. Moreover, it shines a light on the relationship of a therapist and the patient and what many doctors get wrong.
Highly recommended reading for everyone. Literally everyone will benefit from this book, students, teachers, doctors, patients or plain curious people. Short but very deep reading.
The book itself is pretty short, yet very dense with information, sometimes even difficult to read. But how much more rewarding it is, when terrifyingly strong ideas pop up from the field of letters like whales above a calm ocean.
Many of the ideas in the book are also found in book Man's search for meaning (in the second part of the book) from the same author.
It is striking how negatively (and rightfully so) the author looks at psychoanalysis and psychotherapy of the time. Frankly speaking, not much has changed since the book was written in 1977, except for psychopharmaceutics. The author explains that understanding the problem does not necessarily helps solving it. Similarly, a smoker understands that cigarettes might be killing him, but it still does not make quitting easier for him. Moreover, it shines a light on the relationship of a therapist and the patient and what many doctors get wrong.
Highly recommended reading for everyone. Literally everyone will benefit from this book, students, teachers, doctors, patients or plain curious people. Short but very deep reading.
April 21, 2018
Depois de dois livros seguidos do Frankl, só sei de uma coisa: terei todos os livros deste homem na minha biblioteca quando eu crescer.
October 6, 2025
Un pequeño libro elocuente acerca de la necesidad del ser humano de buscar un sentido de la vida al que entregarse. Resulta un tanto técnico clínico y hay varias ideas ya recogidas en "El hombre en busca de sentido", pero siempre es inspirador y emocionante leerlo. Recomendable.
January 3, 2021
Pre každého kto sa stráca v sebe, kto stráca zmysel, kto si (mylne) myslí, že ho nedokáže nájsť.
Veľmi zrozumiteľne napísaná kniha, ktorú si určite neprečítate len raz.
Veľmi zrozumiteľne napísaná kniha, ktorú si určite neprečítate len raz.
November 17, 2025
3.7 ⭐️
Si se busca un libro similar a “El hombre en busca de sentido” quizás este no sea la lectura.
Leer a Viktor Frankl siempre es un placer. Se reflexiona siempre y se adquiere gran conocimiento sobre la logoterapia.
“Cada época tiene sus neurosis, y cada tiempo necesita su psicoterapia.”
Si se busca un libro similar a “El hombre en busca de sentido” quizás este no sea la lectura.
Leer a Viktor Frankl siempre es un placer. Se reflexiona siempre y se adquiere gran conocimiento sobre la logoterapia.
“Cada época tiene sus neurosis, y cada tiempo necesita su psicoterapia.”
April 10, 2024
Un libro muy recomendado para gente que labore en el mundo de la salud mental.
El sentido existencial como elemento clave para el bienestar general.
<>
<>
<>
<>
<>
<>
El sentido existencial como elemento clave para el bienestar general.
<>
<>
<>
<>
<>
<>
December 1, 2021
Дуже сильно про логотерапію і релігію.
"Якщо ціль логотерапії - зцілення душі, то ціль релігії - спасіння душі... Вірити в Бога, значить розуміти, що життя має сенс... А релігійність і є Вищим Сенсом... Любов і віру не можна собі внушити... Ми рухаємося до індивідуальної, глибоко особистісної релігійності, завдяки якій кожна людина зможе звертатися до Бога своєю особливою сокровенною мовою... Про що неможливо сказати, про це потрібно молитися".
"Якщо ціль логотерапії - зцілення душі, то ціль релігії - спасіння душі... Вірити в Бога, значить розуміти, що життя має сенс... А релігійність і є Вищим Сенсом... Любов і віру не можна собі внушити... Ми рухаємося до індивідуальної, глибоко особистісної релігійності, завдяки якій кожна людина зможе звертатися до Бога своєю особливою сокровенною мовою... Про що неможливо сказати, про це потрібно молитися".
November 29, 2016
Apesar da linguagem técnica, portanto algumas vezes indecifrável a leigos num primeiro contato, a obra é altamente instruidora. Com mais de uma leitura, o tema pode ser melhor compreendido, guiando a um entendimento mais acurado do que seja o assim chamado “sentido da vida” e da forma mais apropriada de encontrá-lo.
November 11, 2023
Frankl's view to the other branches of psychology. Also, in these lectures he describes throygh various examples how one needs to have a meaning in life.
If the meaning is absent, the person experiences a feeling of emptiness inside and trying to fulfill that emptiness with superficial things like striving to be the best at something and so on
If the meaning is absent, the person experiences a feeling of emptiness inside and trying to fulfill that emptiness with superficial things like striving to be the best at something and so on
May 27, 2024
Este texto resulta esclarecedor para aquellos que, teniendo alguna noción previa de psicoterapia, no dominan la materia o se han centrado únicamente en las teorías de algunos autores/psiquiatras (Freud, Adler o Jung). Basándose en la Logoterapia, Frankl nos deja algunas lecciones interesantes que nos harán reflexionar y, en algunos casos, cambiar nuestra opinión sobre el vacío existencial.
September 9, 2019
Cuando lo compré, me imaginé que iba a ser del tipo "El hombre en busca del sentido", y pues no fue así.
El libro no es malo, tiene muchas referencias a la Logoterapia y el Psicoanálisis, sin embargo, no deja de ser pesado.
El libro no es malo, tiene muchas referencias a la Logoterapia y el Psicoanálisis, sin embargo, no deja de ser pesado.
November 26, 2021
Primera parte del libro muy buena. Sengunda parte a partir de la pastoral médica decae bastante.
September 25, 2021
At first, three stars may be a little harsh. To help explore this, I want to firstly look at the feeling of meaninglessness in a conceptual sense, then look to Frankl's exploration of it, before finalising with a discussion of Frankl's form and style (which, spoiler alert, let down the book badly).
The title of the book is in itself an interesting proposition. As final causes have retreated, and God has been killed by the murderer of all murderers, a cosmically ordained purpose (knowable or otherwise) has fallen apart. In the vacuum that this absence causes, meaninglessness replaces what was one meaningful. This may merit exploration via both emphasis on the feeling, and the meaninglessness, depending on the focal depth adopted. Treating the phenomena as a concrete occurrence (see myriad statistics quoted by Frankl, and Fromm in Psychoanalysis and Religion, for example) there is also a material history to be explored.
An additional point in wrestling with such a slippery concept of meaninglessness is to understand that which it opposes: what is meaning? This is not to induce some Socratic wild goose chase, but a functional understanding is necessary. Especially given that the often-referenced nihilism invites itself at a variety of levels: cosmic nihilism, where "everything" is meaningless; or more particular nihilisms, where there is no God-given meaning but there may still be personal meaning ascribable (i.e. Camus' absurd man).
I set out this incredibly loose framework to now launch an analysis of Frankl's work. Here I will try and limit my critiques of the form of the work, despite their litany (the book is far from coherent, and is both repetitive and rambling). Frankl proposes Logotherapy as a [complementary] remedy for meaninglessness, which he sees as partially stemming from the pan-determinism of the prevalent psychoanalytic schools which had seeped into the public consciousness in the mid 20th century, and been the mainstay of therapeutic reliance for many decades. As a conceptual framework, Frankl argues that meaning may be found (but cannot be made) through three species of process: creative acts; experiences; and enduring of suffering.
The emphasis on finding of meaning rather than creating meaning is a strange hill for Frankl to take a stand. He addresses the mind-body issue and acknowledges the semi-structuralist or Husserlean contention - where the world is only understandable via what might be understood as subjectivism (Husserl's project was, after all, to make a rigorous study of the subjective) - as being critical.
How are we to engage with any sort of object, when every attempt to grasp an object is necessarily subjectivised? Then in the next move, Frankl dismisses this out of hand with an overly invested pragmatist approach, akin to ‘it’s not therapeutically useful’. (For example, p 147 discussion of electrotherapy which smacks of 'you are worse than us, so who are you to critique!'). This does nothing to address the question of how a necessarily perspectivised patient is able to find meaning in a world which has, by Frankl's own implication, no values in it. Values only to the extent of the interactions and relations by people, hence the three tenets of Logotherapy (below). He does not address that the world of objects is only for subjects – without a subject, no object exists. Yet a subject may self-objectify, and might more reasonably be the wellspring of ‘being-in-the-world’.
A bulwark for Frankl's arguments is the centrality of conscience. Conscience is to Frankl's understanding of Man what the pineal gland was for Descartes. Conscience is deployed to imply a form of 'nature' without openly inviting structuralist critiques. 'Man is foremost responsible to his conscience' (p 218) sounds vaguely insightful and nuanced. Yet, conscience is utilised as a consistent locus for a type of 'shared morality'.
While I am aware I said I would reserve formal critiques for later, this is similar to the affective method for making a point without ever committing to the point (reminiscent of Steve Bannon’s style of communication). By making the point through a hanging rhetorical question, Frankl is able to sufficiently distance himself from it (e.g. p219, where two and two equals four is homologised with every culture worshipping a similar God therefore meaning God exists), while simultaneously making the point while free of any critique. Conscience is a Trojan horse in which the optically neutral Logotherapy can rely on culturally ingrained expectations free from the (perhaps unduly negating) scathing eye of many critical schools. These expectations are therefore deployable without being committed to (for example, the patient finding meaning in being indomitable, p 180) while inducing the desired outcome.
Utilising a similar technique, Frankl is able to disparage the (understandably confusing) proponents of 'being-in-the-world'. His accusation is that there is far too much focus on the 'being', rather than on the 'in-the-world'. Yet this does not, merely by assertion, overcome the complexities which ‘being’ introduces to the world. Moreover, he apparates a concept of 'dimensional ontology' to get at the ability to cast Man in higher or lower planes (p 75). This is somewhat analogous to De Beauvoir’s notion of ambiguity; and yet Frankl attempts to resolve this tension between potentiality and actuality. Where Beauvoir will endure the contradiction in suspension, Frankl attempts to synthesise through a "higher dimension".
There is a complex, and perhaps contradictory, interplay for Frankl regarding actuality and potentiality (p 114). He takes a Liebnitzean or Hegellean position that as potential is actualised, it is lifted from the murky real of ‘not yet’ into a safe world of the past (p 89). He acknowledges the contrast of Being and Becoming, but then sets Becoming the goal of Being. This is not an ontologically thorough position (cf Deleuze, Nietszche). Becoming is not set the goal of Being, but rather run parallel to and encircles Being.
Relating this to dimensional ontology and the alleged contradiction: Frankl seems happy to have tension, such as between actual and potential, or being and becoming, as a catalyst for noological hygiene (p 222); yet simultaneously he attempts to resolve the tension by appeal to higher dimensionality. If resolved, the noological dynamic (p 102) ceases, meaning the metaphoric arch collapses to the detriment of the patient. Yet if the tension isn’t resolved (as Beauvior would argue), then the incessant casting of the noological in higher dimensionality doesn’t serve its therapeutic end, raising the unmasking question of what does it serve? I will not venture any further into this inquiry. Suffice to say that the dichotomy between reaching for potentiality and status quoism (p 114) is not ‘a challenge to philosophy’.
A response Frankl may have had to the Trojan horse allegation is that I am being too conspiratorial and deploying Freud's endeavour of unmasking phenomena too much. And yet, Frankl provides no guide in this book (or in Mans Search for Meaning) on where this 'reasonableness' is found. He merely asserts to stop digging where the "genuine" Man occurs (p 85). This is far from free of the Trojan horse critique; rather he attempts to re-deploy the very same tactic! The “genuine” in Man is posited as some supra-neutral ground which, when not in question, is a theoretical lynchpin. Yet the instant it is under scrutiny, it is discarded, and the metaphoric goal posts are moved.
In tempering this, I am happy to concede that there cannot be an indefinite getting-to-the-back-of that occurs, at least not without God to anchor the infinite regress. Else, an indefinite 'why' can be posed all the way down. But this epistemological constraint does not lend any favours to Frankl's position of stopping where the "genuine" is. For what is genuine? Is the patient/subject to be self-omniscient and incapable of self-deception? I find this incredibly hard to put any weight in.
I will now pivot around this question to look at Frankl's fondness for mysticism (see, for example, p 168 ‘not everything can be explained in meaningful terms’. The silence that follows this is implicitly filled with something like ‘yet we must continue’). What is "genuinely" human, in light of Logotherapy's value lacunae? (This is not mere vacuum, for this would insight the uptake of surrounding values which Frankl disputes - he is explicitly against an adjustment view of patient welfare, p93 in agreement with Allport and Maslow). And how can an author who is so coy with their own theological position then equally assert not only that God may exist as every culture reaches a similar conclusion; but that when posed with a question of image recognition between "600" and "GOD" that there is only one right interpretation of the question, as set by the asking party? There is a mystique and obscurity which Frankl is only happy to propagate.
A response may be: but what impact does this have on his thesis of meaning as a [complement to] psychotherapy in the face of an existential vacuum? Logotherapy still has three core tenets: freedom of will; will to meaning; and meaning of life (p 71). Even if Logotherapy is riddled with a fuzzy-at-best "genuine", an implied God, and objectivism, is it not still potentially useful?
Of course, this is true. A broken clock may make an excellent dining plate. But this does not mean that its tangential utility is synonymous with its final cause. (It is also useful to note that despite the insistence that Logotherapy is a complement to psychoanalytics, the interplay of the two is not explored). The risk, which Frankl seems to defensively skirt, is that the therapist does indeed impart values into the patient - exactly as the alleged psychoanalyst who induces in his patient all forms of Oedipal disagreement (p 224, or p 168 where the unmasking is the psychologists ‘unconscious need to belittle the greatness of man’).
To make matters worse, the paramount value of responsibility - which Frankl argues can strengthen the bearer – can equally cripple the patient. All the while sidelining the patients' own voice or skepticism that the world is simply as is (objectivism) and convincing them that meaning is out there - "just look harder!" - rather than to be created with the personal and material and noological resources available. (Any skerrick of materialist analysis of absent – asking what conditions produce the skepticism which Frankl is too keen to push down - perhaps for the implications during the Cold War of borrowing from the bogeyman of Marx). This risks the excess positivity Byung-Chul Han notes as characteristic of burnout. Especially given that the patient of such extra responsibility continues to need the services of the Logotherapist, as the Logotherapist has the contradiction between the ever-ascending rank of responsibility, and the seeing of the Man in each patient. Logotherapy’s hierarchy of values is both safeguard and impotence.
Amongst this, there is the issue of dog-whistling. This critique is perhaps relying upon the benefit of hindsight. Yet this very mechanic is a technique Frankl himself employs (cf. grieving spouse example) - Kierkegaard was right that life must be lived forward, but only makes sense backwards. Frankl routinely nods to the loss of tradition. This is one of the preconditions for meaninglessness: animality no longer tells man what he must do; and tradition no longer tells man what he should do. The extension of this - which is in some sense quite well-sighted in the mire of contemporary anhedonia - is that soon man will not know even what he wants to do (p 64). The combination of: degradation of tradition being lamentable; latent mysticism or religiousity; anti-criticality; a self-declaration of the genuinely human; and there being a hierarchy of values (p 234) produces a dog-whistle like affect.
Introducing an explicitly political perspective, this is liable to attract those who stand to gain from personalising blame. Often, these are the owners, not the workers or dependents. In short: those atop an existing (property) or previously existing (to some degree, race or gender) hierarchy. There is a (to use contemporary discourse) distinctly conservative tendency. On some of those indicia, perhaps equally the impotent revolutionary may be drawn to admonish responsibility on their comrades (be they Stalinists or Anarchists). However, the implication of a fallen golden age (from the loss of tradition) is incredibly reminiscent of conservativism (see, for example, Ben Teitelbaum’s War for Eternity).
I will now look at a final assessment: Logotherapy is posited against the technique fetishism which Frankl describes in much of other psychotherapy (p 55). Other psychotherapies may tend to focus on the particular technique, such as free association. Interestingly, Frankl notes that this very method somewhat loses its utility as it has become more widely known of (p 224) - and the patient is therefore impacted by both their expectations of what the therapist wants to hear, but also what they think the society expects. This is contrasted with the core humanism of 'seeing the Man' through the disease that Frankl encourages. While far from complete, I would not be surprised to find Frankl’s own methods readily exhaustible in a manner described by Byung-Chul Han, producing their own nascent resistance.
Yet against this very dictum of not focussing on technique, Frankl proposes two specific techniques by way of name dropping: dereflection and paradoxical intent. This leads me to the critique of the form of the book. In short: collating publications from elsewhere is not 'a challenge to psychotherapy and philosophy' as the subtitle would suggest. To my eyes, it is largely a lazy assemblage. The development of ideas - what is "genuine" in man? on what grounds does free will float, not merely in contrast to (and foiled by) determinism and pan-determinism? how can this objective meaning be found, without merely therapist induced revelation? - is severely limited by this almost aphoristic amalgam of journal entries and presentations.
When reading something I intend to take notes on, I usually have an A4 piece of paper folded into quarters, and I write dot points on each notion I wish to record. For this book, I had effectively filled 7.5 quadrants worth. And yet the substance of the book, had it not been merely a republication of other works with points which, by its conclusion served as tropes rather than dynamic responses, could have taken up only 1.5 or 2 quadrants. To read a selection of chapters, this would be a potentially enlightening endeavour worthy of more recommendation. But sitting through the nth repetition of a grieving spouse having saved their now-deceased other half from the task of suffering? I'd rather not.
In light of the scathing tone of the above, how can I give these three stars? Truthfully, because for me Frankl has opened a few interesting areas of exposition (e.g. attempting to read Frankl's will to meaning or anti-self-idolatry in light of Stirner's self-ownership), and I think his [therapeutic rather than publishing] intent is good.
Frankl's intense ire of homunculism is something I think is generally consistent within his theory – despite the blind-to-structuralist assertion that there isn’t a will to power but there is a will to meaning - but also serves as a useful theory inside (and outside) any framework adopted. Man is "not merely" X or Y - producer and consumer; Oedipal patient; or Adlerian power-monger. There is a transcendence involved, no doubt. But there is a critical difference between transcendence being a necessary part of existence (e.g. Beauvoir transcendence and immanence tension - being and becoming; or Sartre’s facticity and transcendence) and transcendence being the essence of existence (p 204, 177).
A final ailment with the structure is how long some parts of the book feel. It felt like an age to get to p 215, where Frankl finally outlined something more than professionalised platitudes in his discussion of contemporary zeitgeist symptoms: day to day ephemeralism; fatalism; collective thinking; and fanaticism. Yet just 10 pages before, in frustration, I noted "I want Frankl to look at what the fuck meaning is, how and where its found, my god".
For this, three stars is accurate: it is both all I can give it for what it earns, and all that I can takeaway in spite of its merits, even judged by its own general mission.
The title of the book is in itself an interesting proposition. As final causes have retreated, and God has been killed by the murderer of all murderers, a cosmically ordained purpose (knowable or otherwise) has fallen apart. In the vacuum that this absence causes, meaninglessness replaces what was one meaningful. This may merit exploration via both emphasis on the feeling, and the meaninglessness, depending on the focal depth adopted. Treating the phenomena as a concrete occurrence (see myriad statistics quoted by Frankl, and Fromm in Psychoanalysis and Religion, for example) there is also a material history to be explored.
An additional point in wrestling with such a slippery concept of meaninglessness is to understand that which it opposes: what is meaning? This is not to induce some Socratic wild goose chase, but a functional understanding is necessary. Especially given that the often-referenced nihilism invites itself at a variety of levels: cosmic nihilism, where "everything" is meaningless; or more particular nihilisms, where there is no God-given meaning but there may still be personal meaning ascribable (i.e. Camus' absurd man).
I set out this incredibly loose framework to now launch an analysis of Frankl's work. Here I will try and limit my critiques of the form of the work, despite their litany (the book is far from coherent, and is both repetitive and rambling). Frankl proposes Logotherapy as a [complementary] remedy for meaninglessness, which he sees as partially stemming from the pan-determinism of the prevalent psychoanalytic schools which had seeped into the public consciousness in the mid 20th century, and been the mainstay of therapeutic reliance for many decades. As a conceptual framework, Frankl argues that meaning may be found (but cannot be made) through three species of process: creative acts; experiences; and enduring of suffering.
The emphasis on finding of meaning rather than creating meaning is a strange hill for Frankl to take a stand. He addresses the mind-body issue and acknowledges the semi-structuralist or Husserlean contention - where the world is only understandable via what might be understood as subjectivism (Husserl's project was, after all, to make a rigorous study of the subjective) - as being critical.
How are we to engage with any sort of object, when every attempt to grasp an object is necessarily subjectivised? Then in the next move, Frankl dismisses this out of hand with an overly invested pragmatist approach, akin to ‘it’s not therapeutically useful’. (For example, p 147 discussion of electrotherapy which smacks of 'you are worse than us, so who are you to critique!'). This does nothing to address the question of how a necessarily perspectivised patient is able to find meaning in a world which has, by Frankl's own implication, no values in it. Values only to the extent of the interactions and relations by people, hence the three tenets of Logotherapy (below). He does not address that the world of objects is only for subjects – without a subject, no object exists. Yet a subject may self-objectify, and might more reasonably be the wellspring of ‘being-in-the-world’.
A bulwark for Frankl's arguments is the centrality of conscience. Conscience is to Frankl's understanding of Man what the pineal gland was for Descartes. Conscience is deployed to imply a form of 'nature' without openly inviting structuralist critiques. 'Man is foremost responsible to his conscience' (p 218) sounds vaguely insightful and nuanced. Yet, conscience is utilised as a consistent locus for a type of 'shared morality'.
While I am aware I said I would reserve formal critiques for later, this is similar to the affective method for making a point without ever committing to the point (reminiscent of Steve Bannon’s style of communication). By making the point through a hanging rhetorical question, Frankl is able to sufficiently distance himself from it (e.g. p219, where two and two equals four is homologised with every culture worshipping a similar God therefore meaning God exists), while simultaneously making the point while free of any critique. Conscience is a Trojan horse in which the optically neutral Logotherapy can rely on culturally ingrained expectations free from the (perhaps unduly negating) scathing eye of many critical schools. These expectations are therefore deployable without being committed to (for example, the patient finding meaning in being indomitable, p 180) while inducing the desired outcome.
Utilising a similar technique, Frankl is able to disparage the (understandably confusing) proponents of 'being-in-the-world'. His accusation is that there is far too much focus on the 'being', rather than on the 'in-the-world'. Yet this does not, merely by assertion, overcome the complexities which ‘being’ introduces to the world. Moreover, he apparates a concept of 'dimensional ontology' to get at the ability to cast Man in higher or lower planes (p 75). This is somewhat analogous to De Beauvoir’s notion of ambiguity; and yet Frankl attempts to resolve this tension between potentiality and actuality. Where Beauvoir will endure the contradiction in suspension, Frankl attempts to synthesise through a "higher dimension".
There is a complex, and perhaps contradictory, interplay for Frankl regarding actuality and potentiality (p 114). He takes a Liebnitzean or Hegellean position that as potential is actualised, it is lifted from the murky real of ‘not yet’ into a safe world of the past (p 89). He acknowledges the contrast of Being and Becoming, but then sets Becoming the goal of Being. This is not an ontologically thorough position (cf Deleuze, Nietszche). Becoming is not set the goal of Being, but rather run parallel to and encircles Being.
Relating this to dimensional ontology and the alleged contradiction: Frankl seems happy to have tension, such as between actual and potential, or being and becoming, as a catalyst for noological hygiene (p 222); yet simultaneously he attempts to resolve the tension by appeal to higher dimensionality. If resolved, the noological dynamic (p 102) ceases, meaning the metaphoric arch collapses to the detriment of the patient. Yet if the tension isn’t resolved (as Beauvior would argue), then the incessant casting of the noological in higher dimensionality doesn’t serve its therapeutic end, raising the unmasking question of what does it serve? I will not venture any further into this inquiry. Suffice to say that the dichotomy between reaching for potentiality and status quoism (p 114) is not ‘a challenge to philosophy’.
A response Frankl may have had to the Trojan horse allegation is that I am being too conspiratorial and deploying Freud's endeavour of unmasking phenomena too much. And yet, Frankl provides no guide in this book (or in Mans Search for Meaning) on where this 'reasonableness' is found. He merely asserts to stop digging where the "genuine" Man occurs (p 85). This is far from free of the Trojan horse critique; rather he attempts to re-deploy the very same tactic! The “genuine” in Man is posited as some supra-neutral ground which, when not in question, is a theoretical lynchpin. Yet the instant it is under scrutiny, it is discarded, and the metaphoric goal posts are moved.
In tempering this, I am happy to concede that there cannot be an indefinite getting-to-the-back-of that occurs, at least not without God to anchor the infinite regress. Else, an indefinite 'why' can be posed all the way down. But this epistemological constraint does not lend any favours to Frankl's position of stopping where the "genuine" is. For what is genuine? Is the patient/subject to be self-omniscient and incapable of self-deception? I find this incredibly hard to put any weight in.
I will now pivot around this question to look at Frankl's fondness for mysticism (see, for example, p 168 ‘not everything can be explained in meaningful terms’. The silence that follows this is implicitly filled with something like ‘yet we must continue’). What is "genuinely" human, in light of Logotherapy's value lacunae? (This is not mere vacuum, for this would insight the uptake of surrounding values which Frankl disputes - he is explicitly against an adjustment view of patient welfare, p93 in agreement with Allport and Maslow). And how can an author who is so coy with their own theological position then equally assert not only that God may exist as every culture reaches a similar conclusion; but that when posed with a question of image recognition between "600" and "GOD" that there is only one right interpretation of the question, as set by the asking party? There is a mystique and obscurity which Frankl is only happy to propagate.
A response may be: but what impact does this have on his thesis of meaning as a [complement to] psychotherapy in the face of an existential vacuum? Logotherapy still has three core tenets: freedom of will; will to meaning; and meaning of life (p 71). Even if Logotherapy is riddled with a fuzzy-at-best "genuine", an implied God, and objectivism, is it not still potentially useful?
Of course, this is true. A broken clock may make an excellent dining plate. But this does not mean that its tangential utility is synonymous with its final cause. (It is also useful to note that despite the insistence that Logotherapy is a complement to psychoanalytics, the interplay of the two is not explored). The risk, which Frankl seems to defensively skirt, is that the therapist does indeed impart values into the patient - exactly as the alleged psychoanalyst who induces in his patient all forms of Oedipal disagreement (p 224, or p 168 where the unmasking is the psychologists ‘unconscious need to belittle the greatness of man’).
To make matters worse, the paramount value of responsibility - which Frankl argues can strengthen the bearer – can equally cripple the patient. All the while sidelining the patients' own voice or skepticism that the world is simply as is (objectivism) and convincing them that meaning is out there - "just look harder!" - rather than to be created with the personal and material and noological resources available. (Any skerrick of materialist analysis of absent – asking what conditions produce the skepticism which Frankl is too keen to push down - perhaps for the implications during the Cold War of borrowing from the bogeyman of Marx). This risks the excess positivity Byung-Chul Han notes as characteristic of burnout. Especially given that the patient of such extra responsibility continues to need the services of the Logotherapist, as the Logotherapist has the contradiction between the ever-ascending rank of responsibility, and the seeing of the Man in each patient. Logotherapy’s hierarchy of values is both safeguard and impotence.
Amongst this, there is the issue of dog-whistling. This critique is perhaps relying upon the benefit of hindsight. Yet this very mechanic is a technique Frankl himself employs (cf. grieving spouse example) - Kierkegaard was right that life must be lived forward, but only makes sense backwards. Frankl routinely nods to the loss of tradition. This is one of the preconditions for meaninglessness: animality no longer tells man what he must do; and tradition no longer tells man what he should do. The extension of this - which is in some sense quite well-sighted in the mire of contemporary anhedonia - is that soon man will not know even what he wants to do (p 64). The combination of: degradation of tradition being lamentable; latent mysticism or religiousity; anti-criticality; a self-declaration of the genuinely human; and there being a hierarchy of values (p 234) produces a dog-whistle like affect.
Introducing an explicitly political perspective, this is liable to attract those who stand to gain from personalising blame. Often, these are the owners, not the workers or dependents. In short: those atop an existing (property) or previously existing (to some degree, race or gender) hierarchy. There is a (to use contemporary discourse) distinctly conservative tendency. On some of those indicia, perhaps equally the impotent revolutionary may be drawn to admonish responsibility on their comrades (be they Stalinists or Anarchists). However, the implication of a fallen golden age (from the loss of tradition) is incredibly reminiscent of conservativism (see, for example, Ben Teitelbaum’s War for Eternity).
I will now look at a final assessment: Logotherapy is posited against the technique fetishism which Frankl describes in much of other psychotherapy (p 55). Other psychotherapies may tend to focus on the particular technique, such as free association. Interestingly, Frankl notes that this very method somewhat loses its utility as it has become more widely known of (p 224) - and the patient is therefore impacted by both their expectations of what the therapist wants to hear, but also what they think the society expects. This is contrasted with the core humanism of 'seeing the Man' through the disease that Frankl encourages. While far from complete, I would not be surprised to find Frankl’s own methods readily exhaustible in a manner described by Byung-Chul Han, producing their own nascent resistance.
Yet against this very dictum of not focussing on technique, Frankl proposes two specific techniques by way of name dropping: dereflection and paradoxical intent. This leads me to the critique of the form of the book. In short: collating publications from elsewhere is not 'a challenge to psychotherapy and philosophy' as the subtitle would suggest. To my eyes, it is largely a lazy assemblage. The development of ideas - what is "genuine" in man? on what grounds does free will float, not merely in contrast to (and foiled by) determinism and pan-determinism? how can this objective meaning be found, without merely therapist induced revelation? - is severely limited by this almost aphoristic amalgam of journal entries and presentations.
When reading something I intend to take notes on, I usually have an A4 piece of paper folded into quarters, and I write dot points on each notion I wish to record. For this book, I had effectively filled 7.5 quadrants worth. And yet the substance of the book, had it not been merely a republication of other works with points which, by its conclusion served as tropes rather than dynamic responses, could have taken up only 1.5 or 2 quadrants. To read a selection of chapters, this would be a potentially enlightening endeavour worthy of more recommendation. But sitting through the nth repetition of a grieving spouse having saved their now-deceased other half from the task of suffering? I'd rather not.
In light of the scathing tone of the above, how can I give these three stars? Truthfully, because for me Frankl has opened a few interesting areas of exposition (e.g. attempting to read Frankl's will to meaning or anti-self-idolatry in light of Stirner's self-ownership), and I think his [therapeutic rather than publishing] intent is good.
Frankl's intense ire of homunculism is something I think is generally consistent within his theory – despite the blind-to-structuralist assertion that there isn’t a will to power but there is a will to meaning - but also serves as a useful theory inside (and outside) any framework adopted. Man is "not merely" X or Y - producer and consumer; Oedipal patient; or Adlerian power-monger. There is a transcendence involved, no doubt. But there is a critical difference between transcendence being a necessary part of existence (e.g. Beauvoir transcendence and immanence tension - being and becoming; or Sartre’s facticity and transcendence) and transcendence being the essence of existence (p 204, 177).
A final ailment with the structure is how long some parts of the book feel. It felt like an age to get to p 215, where Frankl finally outlined something more than professionalised platitudes in his discussion of contemporary zeitgeist symptoms: day to day ephemeralism; fatalism; collective thinking; and fanaticism. Yet just 10 pages before, in frustration, I noted "I want Frankl to look at what the fuck meaning is, how and where its found, my god".
For this, three stars is accurate: it is both all I can give it for what it earns, and all that I can takeaway in spite of its merits, even judged by its own general mission.
December 30, 2023
Das Buch war ganz anders, als ich es erwartet hatte, jedoch konnte es mich letztendlich dennoch überzeugen. Aufgrund des Untertitels „Psychotherapie für heute“ hab ich eher ein Praxisbuch erwartet, das sich mit dem Thema „Sinn“ befasst. Das Buch besteht hingegen aus mehreren Vorträgen Viktor Frankls. Das Buch ist nicht so leicht zu lesen - unter anderem, da es viele psychologische Begriffe enthält, die vorausgesetzt werden.
Frankl entwickelte die Logotherapie als ein therapeutisches Konzept, mit dem sich diese Sinnlosigkeit behandeln lässt - die Heilung durch Selbstfindung.
„Jede Zeit hat ihre Neurose - und jede Zeit braucht ihre Psychotherapie“. Frankl schreibt, dass wir nicht mehr mit einer sexuellen Frustration (wie zur Zeit Freuds), und auch nicht mehr mit Minderwertigkeitsgefühlen (wie zur Zeit von Adler), sondern einem existentiellen Sinnlosigkeitsgefühl konfrontiert sind.
Auch unter dem Aspekt, dass gewisse Aussagen zitiert werden und sie zu anderen Zeiten getätigt wurden, finde ich manche etwas irritierend. Beispielsweise, dass „das Sinnlosigkeitsgefühl in 100% der Fälle der Drogenabhängigkeit zugrunde liegt“ (Stanley Krippner).
Gut gefallen hat mir die Beschreibung, wie man seinem Leben Sinn verleihen kann: „Sinn kann nicht gegeben, sondern muss gefunden werden.“
Frankl entwickelte die Logotherapie als ein therapeutisches Konzept, mit dem sich diese Sinnlosigkeit behandeln lässt - die Heilung durch Selbstfindung.
„Jede Zeit hat ihre Neurose - und jede Zeit braucht ihre Psychotherapie“. Frankl schreibt, dass wir nicht mehr mit einer sexuellen Frustration (wie zur Zeit Freuds), und auch nicht mehr mit Minderwertigkeitsgefühlen (wie zur Zeit von Adler), sondern einem existentiellen Sinnlosigkeitsgefühl konfrontiert sind.
Auch unter dem Aspekt, dass gewisse Aussagen zitiert werden und sie zu anderen Zeiten getätigt wurden, finde ich manche etwas irritierend. Beispielsweise, dass „das Sinnlosigkeitsgefühl in 100% der Fälle der Drogenabhängigkeit zugrunde liegt“ (Stanley Krippner).
Gut gefallen hat mir die Beschreibung, wie man seinem Leben Sinn verleihen kann: „Sinn kann nicht gegeben, sondern muss gefunden werden.“
December 2, 2024
ho letto questo libro da profano in materia, per cui chiaramente, non sarei in grado di intravedere eventuali inesattezze scientifiche.
Pur trattando di materie specialistiche, è scritto in modo chiaro e divulgativo anche per chi, come me, sa ben poco della materia.
L'Autore, per il tramite della logoterapia, supera supera le teorie freudiane che ricollegavano qualsiasi disturbo alla sfera sessuale, ai traumi infantili e all'inconscio. Critica l'approccio freudiano che considera patologico lo stato di chi si interessa al senso della vita, affermando che l'essere umano si distingue dall'animale proprio per questo, e ancora di più, questi pensieri affliggono spesso l'essere umano reduce da decenni di pace e benessere. Ciò non toglie, ovviamente, che si può sfociare in nevrosi e in degenerazioni quali l'abuso di droga ed alcol, l'estremizzazione di odio, livore e violenza, fino al suicidio.
Libro, ahinoi, molto ben collocato nei tempi attuali
Pur trattando di materie specialistiche, è scritto in modo chiaro e divulgativo anche per chi, come me, sa ben poco della materia.
L'Autore, per il tramite della logoterapia, supera supera le teorie freudiane che ricollegavano qualsiasi disturbo alla sfera sessuale, ai traumi infantili e all'inconscio. Critica l'approccio freudiano che considera patologico lo stato di chi si interessa al senso della vita, affermando che l'essere umano si distingue dall'animale proprio per questo, e ancora di più, questi pensieri affliggono spesso l'essere umano reduce da decenni di pace e benessere. Ciò non toglie, ovviamente, che si può sfociare in nevrosi e in degenerazioni quali l'abuso di droga ed alcol, l'estremizzazione di odio, livore e violenza, fino al suicidio.
Libro, ahinoi, molto ben collocato nei tempi attuali
November 26, 2020
[EN/RU] A series of lectures by Viktor Frankl, that discuss the meaning of life, the causes of common neuroses and ways of their treating with the help of logotherapy. The book also discusses the main ideas of existential psychology. Written in simple language for a wide range of readers interested in psychology, as well as for practicing specialists.
Сборник лекций Виктора Франкла, в которых обсуждаются вопросы смысла жизни, причин возникновения распространенных неврозов и способы их устранения с помощью логотерапии, а также приводятся основные идеи экзистенциальной психологии. Книга написана простым языком для широкого круга читателей, интересующихся психологией, а также для практикующих специалистов.
Сборник лекций Виктора Франкла, в которых обсуждаются вопросы смысла жизни, причин возникновения распространенных неврозов и способы их устранения с помощью логотерапии, а также приводятся основные идеи экзистенциальной психологии. Книга написана простым языком для широкого круга читателей, интересующихся психологией, а также для практикующих специалистов.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 63 reviews