is opposed to a principle that characterises most current approaches to man, namely, determinism. Really, however, it is only opposed to what I am used to calling pan-determinism, because speaking of the freedom of will does not in any way imply any a priori indeterminism. After all, the freedom of will means the freedom of human will, and human will is the will of a finite being. Man’s freedom is no freedom from conditions but rather freedom to take a stand on whatever conditions might confront him.”2
Pillar 2
The motivational concept of will to meaning means that every human is animated by a striving and yearning for meaning. The fulfilment of meaning is the meeting of two complimentary parts: an “internal” part – this striving and yearning for meaning – and an “external” part, the meaning offered by a situation. If the will to meaning in human beings is constrained by illness, immaturity or senility, which does sometimes happen, then this is an impairment in the perception of the external part and not an attrition of the internal part, which remains a proof of humanness even in the case of serious disorders. Logotherapy is meaning-centred psychotherapy.
“Meaning is something objective, and that is not just an expression of my own private and personal worldview, but something which has been verified by psychological research. Max Wertheimer, one of the founders of gestalt psychology, explicitly pointed out that every situation possesses the character of a demand, namely ‘the meaning’ that the person who is facing the situation has to fulfil. ‘The demands of the situation’ are to be responded to as ‘objective qualities’. What I call the will to meaning seems to lead to something like a gestalt concept. James Crumbaugh and Leonard T. Maholick describe the will to meaning as the specifically human ability to discover objective meaning not only in the actual, but also in the possible.”3
Pillar 3
The postulate of meaningfulness of life expresses the logotherapeutic conviction that life has an unconditional meaning which it cannot lose under any circumstances. This meaning can, however, evade human comprehension. Insofar as this meaning is too big to be grasped by humans, it must always be perceived and sensed anew. It follows that logotherapy is a positive worldview.
“There is no situation in life that is really meaningless. This is because the seemingly negative aspects of human existence, especially the tragic triad which consists of suffering, guilt and death, can also be fashioned into something positive, into an achievement, if only they are faced with the right composure and attitude.”4
The figure shows that each pillar corresponds to a disciplinary form of logotherapy. Freedom of will is the basis for its concept of the human being and shapes its anthropological foundations. The will to meaning is the starting point and pivotal point of its therapeutic approach and therefore pervades all of its psychotherapeutic methods. The meaning of life, that is, belief in the unconditional meaningfulness of human life under any and all circumstances, belongs to its worldview, to its philosophy.
In this textbook of logotherapy we will principally be thinking about logotherapy as a therapeutic approach. To apply its methods successfully, it is essential to get to know at least the main features of its concept of the human being. It is just as essential to apply the worldview of logotherapy to preventative and follow-up care. For this reason, and to provide a broader view of the philosophy of its teachings, a brief description of the anthropological foundations of logotherapy is given first, followed by an explanation of how logotherapy deals with psychic disturbances.
Before we begin, it is appropriate to answer a frequently asked question: how scientific can a structure of thought be, when it is built on two pillars which cannot be empirically verified, as is the case with the first and third pillars? Well, every form of psychotherapy has its own specific axiomatic basis. The entire field of medicine requires at least one such pillar to justify its existence, namely the belief that human life is of value and is to be preserved. Without this axiom there would be no reason to treat sick people, or to operate on them; one could simply allow them to die. It cannot be scientifically proven that there is any advantage in prolonging life, especially in the context of global overpopulation. We should not, however, allow our belief in the fundamental importance and value of human life to be shaken; it resonates deeply within us, and it is strengthened in logotherapy by the elements of meaningfulness.
The problem of freedom of will is even more controversial. But here as well, all forms of psychotherapy must at least agree on the basic assumption that a patient is capable of changing. Without this assumption, therapeutic efforts would be pointless from the outset, and yet such a capacity for change cannot be proved, or if so, only in retrospect.
“Logotherapy and existential analysis are admittedly based on clinical practice, but one cannot evade the fact that they flow into a meta-clinical theory, as all psychotherapies have as an implicit basis; and this theory implies a vision, that is, the vision of a concept of the human being. In this way we come full circle: clinical practice is always determined and influenced to a large extent by the concept of the human being that the doctor brings to the patient, even if it is unconscious and uncontrolled. In fact, every psychotherapy plays itself out against an a priori horizon. There is always an anthropological concept at its base, whether the psychotherapy is conscious of it or not.” 5
The Concept of Dimensional Ontology
Viktor E. Frankl presented his concept of the human being by means of his concept of “dimensional ontology”. He unfolded being human into three dimensions: somatic, psychological, and spiritual. The analogy with the three-dimensionality of space makes it clear that this is not a theory of three “layers”. The human dimensions of being interpenetrate one another as completely as the three dimensions of space: length, height and breadth. For example, it would be ridiculous to say that the spatial dimension “width” begins where the spatial dimension “length” ends. It is the same for human beings: for a human all three dimensions of being meet at every “point”. Frankl spoke of a “unity in spite of diversity”.
The somatic level of a human is easy to define: it corresponds to all physical phenomena. It includes organic cell activity and biological-physiological bodily functions, including all associated chemical and physical processes.
The psychic plane of the human being is to be understood as the sphere of condition: mood, instincts, desires, affects. To these psychic phenomena we add intellectual talent, acquired patterns of behaviour, and social formation. In short, cognition and emotion are “at home” in the psychic dimension.
What is left over for the spiritual plane? An endless amount! The “primal human” aspect, namely the freedom to determine one’s attitudes to body and condition. Independent decision-making (“intentionality”), technical and artistic interests, creative activity, religiosity and ethical sensibility (“conscience”), an understanding of values and love are all located in the spiritual dimension of the human being.
If we were to divide the living beings on earth according to their participation in the different dimensions of being, we would arrive at the following, with a minimal number of transitional forms:
We see that the spiritual plane (which has nothing to do with intelligence or understanding) is the real human one, the “uniquely human” dimension; in logotherapy it is also called the “noetic dimension”, from the Greek word nous (spirit or mind). The other two levels, which humans share with animals, i.e. the somatic and the psychosocial dimensions (animals also have emotions and cognition to a certain extent!), are characterised in logotherapy as the “psychophysical” or the “subnoetic
