findings is that there is a clear relationship between a sense of meaning in life and one’s quality of life (Iwasaki, 2006), which strongly suggests a range of determining factors. Also, Frankl (1992) argued that while there was no universal definition of life meaning, some of its constituents included loving someone or something other than oneself, exercising choice of action (at least choice of attitude regarding how to respond to life events irrespective of circumstances), taking responsibility to solve problems presented by life and fulfilling requisite life tasks, and having a goal towards which to aspire (which may be perceived as a personal mission in life). In the rest of the book, we will refer to the problems identified by Frankl as “issues of meaning/meaningfulness/meaninglessness” rather than adopting Frankl’s construct of “noogenic neurosis”.
This departure from Frankl’s terminology is necessary due to recognition of the fact that these issues are more socially based and therefore they are not ‘diseases as such’. They are often consequences of social problems such as domination of minority by majority cultures with subsequent loss of indigenous cultural values, materialism that makes it very difficult for people to dwell on activities related to deeper reflection, self-understanding, meaningful connection with others, and meaningful connection to important institutions such as religious organizations or other bodies that provide guidance to individuals in formulation of values. Furthermore, people experiencing problems of meaninglessness are properly viewed as victims of these social dynamics. As such, we think it is wrong to refer to what they are experiencing as diseases because that would imply that they need to be cured, while what they really need is: 1) to learn how to cope with social problems; or 2) help removing social barriers to meaning in their lives.
Consistent with Frankl’s discussion of the indicators of life meaning, based on factorial analysis, Iwasaki (2006) deduced some of the constituents of a meaningful life as: goal-oriented life, positive emotions, self-esteem, and sense of identity. According to Iwasaki, these factors have been found to be related to lower incidences of depression, high levels of hopefulness, and a good quality of life. It has also been found that positive emotions, self –esteem, sense of identity, and goal oriented life are enhanced through what occupational therapists and scientists refer to as occupations [i.e., “chunks of culturally and personally meaningful activity(ies) in which humans engage that can be named in the lexicon of the culture” (Clark, Parham, Carlson, Frank et al., 1991, p. 301)]. For example, participation in leisure occupations has been found to contribute to an experience of positive emotions and sense of well-being, positive identity and self-esteem, social and cultural connection, learning and development, and demonstration of personal strength and resilience, and in the process, to a sense of meaning in life (Iwasaki, 2006).
For a long time, work has also been recognized as a central constituent of a meaningful life. In the literary world, one of the best illustrations of this centrality of work to meaning-making is the story of Ivan Ilych (Bayley, 1967) written by Tolstoy (1960). In this story, Tolstoy described the desolation that Ivan Ilych, reflecting on his past life, felt at his deathbed. Having lived largely for the social and material benefits his position in the Ministry of Justice brought him, he suddenly realized how meaningless it had all been. In increasing physical pain he renounces everything, even his fear of death, and is finally able to die. As Michaelson (2007) observes in his commentary on the story, for many, work seems to be viewed as antithetical to meaningful life as seen in the statement that many people make to the effect that “one is too busy working” to be living (p. 335). Such statements, Michaelson argues, raise the question of whether working is the opposite of meaningful living. Illich (1980), for example, argued for the right to useful unemployment, and Lafargue (1996) for the right to be lazy. Clearly opinions about the meaningfulness of work are divided: some people argue that work has no meaning, and others argue that it is the essence of a meaningful life.
Michaelson further argues that the issue is not that Ilych or anyone else for that matter worked too much and therefore did not live as full a life as they might, or that the work they did was meaningless. Rather, the issue is that people fail “to live meaningfully” (p. 335). To avoid meaningless living, he suggests that one find a way of integrating work into his/her life such that it is part of “a life well lived” (p. 335). That means that one has to find a way of escaping the pitfalls of pathological use of work as illustrated in the apparently meaningless life of Tolstoy’s Ivan Ilych. In the story, Ilych used his work as: 1) an escape from an unsatisfactory marital life, in which he uses the social and material benefits as a way of keeping his wife occupied and appeased; 2) a way to avoid facing the authentic self; 3) a way of avoiding confrontation with his bare humanity; and 4) his entire identity. Ilych thus failed to recognize the moral value of his work in terms of what it could contribute to the good of humanity, and therefore, it became essentially meaningless. However, if contextualized properly, work can be a deep source of meaning in one’s life as illustrated by Frankl (1992). In a statement to a fellow prisoner at the Auschwitz concentration camp, Frankl passionately stated that the manuscript that he had smuggled into the camp at great risk to himself was his life’s work. To him, this work contributed to his life meaning to the extent that he was ready to die for it precisely because he saw it as contributing to something larger than himself.
However, Frankl’s life work was a creation, something in which he had invested himself and which represented the expression of his thoughts, i.e. it had a cultural dimension. Many people do not consider work to represent anything expressive. Rather, they see it as a means of earning money, although it may also be a source of opportunities for social interaction and expression of some interest. Lafargue (1996), Marx’s son in law, wrote the Right to be Lazy in 1883 while living in Northern France. He was concerned about the conditions of workers in the textiles mills of the region, many of whom worked 14 hour shifts and were injured because they were so tired they were prone to accidents. The money they received was very low, and for all their long shifts and risk of injury or death, the goods they produced were often dumped on the market in order to be sold off quickly to make room for the newest textile fashions. Lafargue argued that the workers, many of them women and children, deserved better and safer conditions. Similar arguments are still raised with regard to the exploitation of children and other workers today in the manufacture of textiles, sports goods and fashion items. The factories which produce them have moved into countries where labor is cheap and guidelines for improvement of health and safety conditions are more relaxed. In the UK, the rising demand for low paid workers in the private agencies in the social care industry has resulted in many women working flexible hours but on low rates of pay. This often results in a noxious combination of low motivation and long shifts, with an increase in risks for back injuries and other forms of accidents and injuries. People who work in such conditions can hardly be seen as having an opportunity to see their work as having any meaning in their lives other than simply a source of money.
The contribution of the meaninglessness of work in the modern society to the problems that Frankl identified is clear. Illich (1980) argued that a lot of what was actually produced in a capitalist society was not assigned monetary value. The labor expended by people engaged in production of such goods, he argued, was therefore not recognized as having worth in capitalist terms, even though it was useful in helping to maintain community. For example, volunteering in a soup kitchen, caring for an elderly parent, or teaching kindergarten is not valued much in a capitalist economy. Yet, such work is critical to the well-being of the community and society as a whole, and therefore is very meaningful work in Frankl’s sense. Furthermore, Illich maintained that many of the things produced in a capitalist system have a built in obsolescence, or else are subject to the manipulation of fashion. Therefore many workers are engaged in production of things which do not have real community value, such as producing 20 varieties of cereals, or 100 types of body-wash.
Many of the things we purchase with the money we earn from producing these things without real value are themselves without real purpose. We go shopping to buy things which make us temporarily feel good, but ultimately, they are not particularly useful. Clothes look good for a year or so and then become old fashioned. The average music CD or a DVD, once purchased, is probably played three times while in our possession and then never listened to or viewed again. Each year people in the UK generate tons of
