
Viktor Frankl: Why believe in others [video] (1972) - tosh
https://www.ted.com/talks/viktor_frankl_youth_in_search_of_meaning/up-next
======
pmoriarty
It's important to understand that for Frankl, the meaning of life was not
something to be sought out in the world, but rather it was a question that
life asked of you and that you answered in the way you lived your life.

In this view he disagreed with and distinguished himself from those
existentialists who held that life was meaningless.

Further, he felt that even in the worst and most restrictive of circumstances
(such as in concentration camps) one could still choose what attitude to adopt
towards what one was forced to go through, and could choose to answer the
questions life asked of you with dignity.

~~~
dan00
> In this view he disagreed with and distinguished himself from those
> existentialists who held that life was meaningless.

I don’t think of a disagreement in this regard, because even if there’s
objectively no meaning in life, it doesn’t mean that there’s also no
subjective meaning.

I think that was the whole point of Frankl, how you can find and develop this
subjective meaning.

~~~
uoaei
Nihilism, after all the "nothing is real" hemming and hawing, is a free pass
to define life how you want to.

It aligns closely with Eastern traditions along these lines.

~~~
ramblerman
nihilism does not just say "nothing is real"!

It says nothing is real so everything is pointless. They might share the base
premise, but it's a pretty important distinction.

------
davesque
Victor Frankl's book, "Man's search for meaning" is also essential reading in
my opinion. A few of my takeaways from that book:

1\. People are capable of both great evil and great good (often in close
proximity).

2\. Having a great intellect may, in fact, make someone more compassionate.

3\. Finding meaning in a cause, project, person, etc. can allow a person to
endure much more than most would expect.

For those who aren't familiar with Frankl's personal background, you'll find
many of the relevant details in that book (and perhaps also in the linked
video although I haven't finished it yet). Trust me when I say that the man
has a legitimate claim to discuss the topics on which he tends to focus.

~~~
rayalez
_> Ultimately, man should not ask what the meaning of his life is, but rather
must recognize that it is he who is asked._

~~~
in0v8r
Currently, on my 2nd read of the book and I interpret this as a struggle to
find purpose. Recognizing who asked is like asking yourself "Who am I?" which
leads to purpose and with purpose comes endurance. This may be superficial as
I gain more insight the more I read it.

------
ssivark
_“When we treat man as he is we make him worse than he is. When we treat him
as if he already was what he potentially could be. We make him what he should
be.”_ — Goethe, as quoted by Frankl

This crucial insight seems to enable the best leaders—be they parents,
teachers, organizers, etc—to bring the best out of their people.

It’s also something highly under-appreciated in contemporary economics and
management theory (and policy making, correspondingly).

~~~
mythrwy
If not done with absolute precision that sounds like a recipe for over
inflated egos and unrealistic beliefs and expectations. In other words, the
problems lots of kids of helicopter parents and modern western culture have.

~~~
ssivark
There's centuries/millenia of culture that serves as a guide for how to do it
right. Nurturing humans to achieve their potential and live their life to the
fullest it not a new problem. It's not like Victor Frankl _invented_ this
stuff sixty years ago.

And I don't think it requires absolute precision in action -- just a
willingness to observe, think and iterate. After all, the influencer is as
much of a human as the influenced. We're talking about influence over the
scale of years, if not decades.

This is one of those domains where the "Lindy effect" might be a good rule of
thumb -- the longer a guide has survived, the longer it is likely to survive,
because the likelier it is to add value. Conversely, many "modern
breakthroughs" are likely to be fads.

------
jmfayard
I love everything about this:

The accent, the humor, the content, the man, his life and his books.

I never quite understood why so much Americans are out there just "to make a
lot of money".

Lot of money, but realistically probably not enough to cover their uncovered
healthcare costs once their health get worse.

But even in the best case, you earned a lot of money, you die rich, and that
was it?

Recognizing capitalism as a fact is one thing (that I do myself), worshipping
it like Ayn Rand belongs to the dullest ideologies ever invented. Capitalism
does not care that you are worshipping it damnit!

Then I have read Max Weber and understood it all:

"The Protestant Ethic and The Spirit Of Capitalism"

Oh yes, _that_ makes a lot of sense. It's not just capitalism, there is deeper
meaning behind it and it comes from religion.

By contrast, I was raised as a Catholic - I'm not an Catholic today, but
that's was my education was - so I learned from an early age that talking
about money all the time is not what good people do.

~~~
pbourke
> I never quite understood why so much Americans are out there just "to make a
> lot of money".

As a counterpoint, the US is perhaps the most charitable advanced nation (in
terms of charitable giving per capita). Take from that what you will, but
perhaps the conclusion should not be “Americans are more greedy or
materialistic than others”.

> I learned from an early age that talking about money all the time is not
> what good people do

For better or worse money is a major component of agency both in your own life
and in society at large. On a personal level, reducing your working hours to
spend more time with your family requires a focus on money to make that
happen. On a societal level, there is no universal health care, affordable
education or shift to clean energy without deep and involved conversations
about money.

~~~
jmfayard
My conclusions were not what you quote. I agree with your final point.

My conclusions were that both my reluctance to talk about money and US
fascination for material success had a religious background.

