Man’s Search for Meaning was first published in 1946. Since then, it has been printed in over 50 languages and released in various versions – with prefaces, forewords, and afterwords by different experts – and has sold over 16 million copies. The author, Victor E. Frankl, an Austrian psychiatrist, wrote this account over nine consecutive days. The original German title translates to A Psychologist Experiences the Concentration Camp, while the first English-translated version is titled From Death-Camp to Existentialism.

Given the contemporary title, it seems ironic that Frankl’s story has been challenged and dissected for its motivation and intent, as surmised by T. Pytell in The Case Against Viktor Frankl: Rollo May's attacks on logotherapy. Nevertheless, the book is regarded as one of the most influential of our time, offering readers the opportunity for perspective, reflection, and ultimately, choice.

Part One

Part One of the book is presented in a disjointed manner, considering both chronological order and the need to build upon previous points, requiring analytical skills to fully extract Frankl’s meaning. This fragmented messaging likely arises from the short timeframe to compile Part One and the multitude of experiences Frankl sought to draw upon in documenting a convincing, justified, and comprehensive explanation to support his theory (provided in Part Two). He outlines three stages of the psychological response to incarceration in concentration camps: shock, apathy, and liberation. 

To illustrate these stages, Frankl provides insights into how both he and others were treated, evoking sympathy in the reader for the effects of depersonalisation. However, I contend that ‘dehumanisation’ was the instigator of this psychological deterioration. The stage of shock is characterised by a lack of nourishment, sleep, safety, security, trust, and freedom. Interestingly, these elements are key components of American psychologist Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.

Although Maslow’s theory has been criticised for a lack of scientific evidence, a focus on Western culture, and a simplified, linear model of needs priorities, Frankl consistently recognised that these needs are important for individuals to feel satisfied and fulfilled. He later observed that prisoners altered their behaviours and channelled an intense inner focus, a defence mechanism for self-preservation, which diminished their concern for others and reduced their motivation for meeting basic needs. He theorises that those who persisted with a future focus, who had known, valued, and cherished love for another, and those who maintained optimism in the face of hardship, were best positioned to both sense and experience liberation upon release from oppression.

Part Two

Part Two is an essay outlining the components of logotherapy, a form of psychotherapy that Frankl coined in 1938. He draws on his experiences and observations from his imprisonment between 1941 and 1945 to support his hypothesis, which emphasises that ‘meaning’ in one’s life is realised through the ‘why’ rather than the ‘how’ one exists.

To explain the application of logotherapy, Frankl compares a logotherapist to an ophthalmologist, stating that they seek to “…enable us to see the world as it really is…”, contrasting a painter who “…conveys to us a picture of the world as he sees it.” He urges individuals to actively seek their own meaning with conviction, asserting that each person must reflect that they, “cannot be replaced … nor can his life be repeated,” which is a powerful and sobering truth.

Logotherapy centres on finding meaning through actions, feelings, and suffering. The first aspect refers to needing something to live for – a goal – though Frankl states that it should not be easily attainable in a tensionless state, but rather a balance of ‘striving and struggling’. He further emphasises the ‘existential vacuum’; an inability to find meaning – a passion and drive for life – is a result of boredom and emptiness, brought about by the increased leisure and free time afforded to society, primarily due to modernisation. I surmise that purposeful actions and subsequent achievements yield individuals’ self-worth and value, providing meaning to fill actual and perceived voids. 

The second element is meaning through feeling: love. In Part One, Frankl described how his love for his wife sustained him during tough times, and he was galvanised by the thought of reuniting with her upon liberation. He suggests that loving another enables one to recognise the essential traits in that person, which reflect their potential. In other sections of the essay, the unique love between a parent and child is mentioned; however, it is referenced to explain the meaning of suffering.

Disappointingly, Frankl’s explanation regarding the meaning of love is brief and specific to intimate relationships, leaving the quantifiable content of this component wanting. Although Frankl’s postscript – from a lecture delivered in 1983 – provides an oversimplification of this element, describing it as, “experiencing something or encountering someone”, he does highlight that experiencing goodness, trust, and beauty can draw meaning through love. I contemplate that meaning through love – both romantic and platonic – requires an openness and willingness to experience that love, approached with positivity and receptiveness to extend beyond a superficial level.

The final focus is on meaning in (unavoidable) suffering. Frankl stresses that one should not seek suffering; rather, ‘perspective’ is key to turning tragedy into triumph. He quotes US logotherapy pioneer Edith Weisskopf-Joelson, who proposed that individuals should take pride in suffering as proof of survival. Frankl emphasises that our response to suffering should be to seek the positives arising from that suffering: the lessons learnt and an optimism about what may follow a period of suffering.

Frankl implores us to “suffer bravely,” which may be interpreted as suggesting one should conceal or dismiss the right to grieve. However, in his postscript, he defines ‘tragic optimism,’ promoting the idea that overcoming suffering is an accomplishment, whereby guilt empowers one to change for the better, and the transitory nature of life beseeches responsible action. I reflect that maintaining an anticipative outlook – that there is ‘more to come beyond this point in time’ – gives meaning to suffering. Suffering can be turned into opportunity and serves as evidence of resilience, adaptability, and growth.

Summary

As a closing thought, Frankl suggests that people with ‘human problems’ often view all issues as neurotic, related to anxiety, worry, irritability, or depression. While he acknowledges the existence of neurotic problems, Frankl emphasises that engaging with a faith-based administrator and applying logotherapy are ways to identify causal effects, focusing on ‘meaning’ first, rather than disorders.

Meaning is not discovered through transient, external forces. It is self-determined, grounded, purposeful, nurtured through connection, requires responsibility, and is ultimately driven by attitude. Man’s Search for Meaning offers readers profound insight into the ‘why’ of living rather than the ‘how’. Through the hardships experienced in concentration camps, Frankl identified that “Everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms – to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way.”