[Neurons] 2008 Meta Reflections #52

[Dr. Hall]

From:  L. Michael Hall

Nov 24, 2008

Meta Reflection #52

 

 

HOW VIKTOR FRANKL

MISUNDERSTOOD MEANING

                        

 

I recently re-read one of Viktor Frankl's books as part of my research into
the Human Potential Movement.  His 1978 book, The Unheard Cry for Meaning is
an excellent work on Logo-Therapy and two of the primary techniques of
Logo-therapy.  Yet in exploring that book again and now from the perspective
of "Whatever happened to the Human Potential Movement," I recognized some of
the things I've seen in every one of the leaders with the exception of
Masow.  And now what I've been seeing through the lens of history provides a
tremendous warning to those of us in the legacy of NLP and Neuro-Semantics.

 

I began re-reading Frankl because I knew that he did not miss the role of
meaning in self-actualization as Maslow did.  I also began reading to see if
I could understand through the lens of Frankl perhaps how Maslow missed
meaning.  If you haven't read Self-Actualization Psychology, I have a whole
chapter on this subject along with my proposals as to how Maslow missed
meaning.  He certainly did not miss it as a theme.  He put meaning and
meaningfulness at the top of the pyramid-as the heart and soul of
self-actualizing.  But he did miss it in terms of the processes inside the
hierarchy of needs-conditioning the needs.  And yet in saying that, he did
catch it, only in different terminology.

 

In The Unheard Cry for Meaning Frankl talks about Logo-Therapy being
accounted as part of Humanistic Psychology and he quotes Maslow and Maslow's
acknowledgment of "the will to meaning" as "man's primary concern." (page
29).  Twice in the book, Frankl quotes Maslow's approval of his work.  But
never does he return the favor.  Reflecting upon that stunned me.  I know it
shouldn't- Will Schultz didn't, Carl Rogers didn't.  But I thought Frankl
would.  But he also did not.

 

And to make matters worse he misunderstood Maslow as he certainly
mis-represented Maslow's hierarchy.  To put the best spin on this as I can,
I have to say that Frankl probably never read Motivation and Personality
(1954) by Maslow and so just did not understand the Hierarchy of needs.
Here's what he wrote:

"Maslow's motivation theory does not suffice here, for what is needed is not
so much the distinction between higher and lower needs, but rather an answer
to the question of whether individual goals are mere means, or meanings."
(pp. 32-33)

 

"I thereby understand the primordial anthropological fact that being human
is being always directed, and pointing, to something or someone other than
oneself: to a meaning to fulfill or another human being to encounter, a
cause to serve or a person to love.  Only to the extent that someone is
living out this self-transcendence of human existence, is he truly human or
does he become his true self.  He becomes so, not by concerning himself with
himself-actualization, but by forgetting himself and giving himself,
overlooking himself and focusing outward." (p. 35)

 

Here Frankl presents the choice between self-actualization and
self-forgetfulness in the format of an either-or: 

Not lower and higher needs distinction - but means or meanings.

            Self-actualization - or self-transcendence.

 

As much as I like Frankl, and in fact made Frankl's work part of my
dissertation, in re-reading his work I see that he completely misunderstood
what Maslow meant by self-actualization.  For Maslow, the actualizing of
oneself means living for something bigger than oneself.  What Frankl defines
as "self-transcendence" Maslow called "self-actualization."  But Frankl
seemed to need to make a contrast and make Maslow wrong so that he could
present self-transcendence as something that went beyond self-actualization.


 

As Frankl continued to define self-transcendence he said that it means
reaching out not only for a meaning to fulfill, but also for another human
being to love.   He said that we transcend ourselves by either meaning
fulfillment in some work or achievement or by a loving encounter with
another human being.  He then wrote the following as part of the way he
defined self-transcendence:

"Self-Actualization is possible only as a byproduct of self-transcendence.'
(p. 94)

 

But for Maslow, self-actualization is not for the self and not even by the
self.  He constantly wrote and emphasized that we actualize with and through
others, and that we do so by finding a larger meaning in other
things-contribution, justice, fairness, mathematics, music, learning, love,
etc.  We actualize by getting out of ourselves, forgetting ourselves, and
getting lost in an engagement that completely consumes our interest and
attention.  It is in that way that we transcend ourselves.  So for Maslow
these two terms were inter-changeable, not contrasts.  So by dichotomizing
them, Frankl perpetuates an unfounded mis-representation of Maslow.

 

Frankl also criticized the Hierarchy of Needs model:

"Maslow's hierarchy of needs appears to apply here: first one must achieve a
satisfactory standard of living and only then may he approach the task of
finding a purpose and meaning in life."

 

But he disagreed and talked about exceptions-when someone didn't have their
lower needs met and still went after meaning.  Of course, Maslow wrote about
that extensively in Motivation and Personality.  And he commented repeatedly
that the Hierarchy is not as hierarchical or rigid as it might at first
appear.

 

Upon reading Frankl I was stunned that he had to make Maslow wrong in order
to highlight his contribution of the importance of meaning.  Unlike Maslow,
who was so inclusive and so ready to find the value and contribution of
others, Frankl did not.

 

What I have not found in my readings and research into Maslow-not in the two
biographies of him, not in his Journals, nor his Memories is an explanation
of his inclusiveness, his non-competitiveness, his willingness to embrace
others who differed, and his belief in the possibilities of others, even
colleagues.  I would not have thought that that leadership trait would be
that rare, that unique, and that missing in the lives of other leaders.  But
it seems to be.  And perhaps that's one of the highest qualities we need
today.

 

 

 

 

 




 

 

L.  Michael Hall, Ph.D.

International Society of Neuro-Semantics

Meta-Coach Training System

P.O. Box 8

Clifton, CO.  81520 USA

1 970-523-7877

1 970-523-5790 fax

     www.neurosemantics.com 

      www.neuro-semantics-trainings.com 

      www.self-actualizing.org

      www.meta-coaching.org

      www.ns-video.com 

 

The International Egroup for Neuro-Semantics is Neurons.  Sign up for Free
subscription on www.neurosemantics.com -- Meta Reflection articles sent out
every Monday.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://eight.pairlist.net/pipermail/neurons/attachments/20081124/8b2e1f6f/attachment.html>