The author, Dr Frank, is a psychiatrist. He often asks patients in great pain: "Why don't you kill yourself?" The patient's answer can usually provide him with clues to treatment. For example, some are for children, some are because a talent has yet to be developed, and some may just be to preserve a precious and unforgettable memory. Weaving meaning and responsibility for a sad person with these slender filaments-this is the goal and challenge of "logotherapy Therapy", and it is also Dr. Frank's original view on modern existence analysis.
In this book, Dr. Frank gives his own account, detailing how he invented the "logotherapy Method" based on his own personal experience. He used to be a prisoner in a concentration camp, and his long prison life left him with nothing but a sigh of relief. His parents, brother and wife either died in the prison camp or were sent to the gas chamber. The whole family died, leaving only him and his sister. How can a person who has lost everything, is hungry and cold, and is in danger of death at any time think that life still has value? A psychologist who has personally experienced this terrible experience must be worthy of our attention. A man like him is bound to be able to look at the human situation with wisdom and compassion.
We can't help comparing Frank's thought and treatment with his predecessor Freud. The two masters are most concerned about the nature and treatment of neurosis. Freud found out the crux of the obstacle from the anxiety caused by contradictions and subconscious motives, while Frank divided neurosis into several categories, and attributed several of them (such as mental neurosis) to the fact that patients could not find meaning and responsibility from their own existence. Freud emphasized the importance of sexual frustration, while Frank emphasized the importance of frustration in the will to seek meaning.
Today, Europeans give up Freud and turn to existential analysis, and the logotherapy School is one of them. Frank's views are tolerant. He did not exclude Freud, but took the latter's academic contribution as the basis of his theoretical framework. He didn't quarrel with other existential therapeutic schools, but regarded them as brothers.
Although this book is small, its structure is ingenious and it is exciting to read. I watched it twice and finished it at once, as if under a spell. In the story part, Dr. Frank once introduced his personal experience of "meaning therapy". Because he introduced the story in a gentle and subtle way, only after reading the whole book will readers realize that this paragraph has special significance, not just another cruel episode in the concentration camp.
This autobiographical text is very thought-provoking, and readers can get a glimpse of how a person will behave when he suddenly realizes that he "has nothing but this ridiculous shabby suit". In Frank's works, this kind of sigh and detachment is the most exciting. First, the indifference and transcendental curiosity of the parties to their own destiny; Then, although the chances of survival are slim, they still try their best to save their lives. As for hunger, humiliation, fear and indignation at inhumanity, they all cherish the beautiful image of their loved ones in their hearts, or have an inexhaustible sense of humor, or because of their religious beliefs, or even a glimpse of flowers, trees and the morning sun.
However, these comforts are not enough to stimulate the will to survive, unless they can help the parties see some truth from the seemingly meaningless pain. This is the central idea of existentialism: to live is suffering, and to live is to find meaning from suffering. If life really has a purpose, so must pain and death. However, no one can tell others what this purpose is. Everyone has to seek for himself and accept the responsibility stipulated in his answer. If he finds it, he will continue to grow even if he is humiliated. Frank especially likes to quote Nietzsche's sentence: "People who know why they are alive can endure almost any pain."
Everything in the concentration camp was deliberately designed to make the prisoners lose their autonomy. All the familiar goals in life have been plundered, leaving only "the last freedom of mankind": the ability to take personal attitude in certain situations. This ultimate freedom has been mentioned by ancient stoics and contemporary existentialists. In Frank's story, it is especially vivid. The prisoners in the concentration camp are just ordinary people, but at least a few people can decide to make themselves "worthy of suffering", thus confirming people's ability to transcend external destiny.
As a psychotherapist, I certainly want to know what kind of help people need to acquire this unique ability. How can we wake up a patient and make him feel that no matter how miserable his situation is, he has the responsibility to find the meaning of life? Frank once held a group therapy meeting with his cellmate. This meeting has a touching description in this book.
At the invitation of the publisher, Dr. Frank added the second part to his autobiography, explaining the basic concept of "logotherapy Law". In the past, most of the publications of the third school of psychotherapy in Vienna (the first two schools were Freudian school and Adler school) were distributed in Germany. Therefore, Dr. Frank's supplementary work will be welcomed by readers.
Frank is different from many existentialist scholars in Europe; He is neither pessimistic nor opposed to religion. On the contrary, he has experienced pain everywhere and faced evil forces, but he can believe that human beings have enough potential to transcend difficulties and find a truth that can promote their own growth. I sincerely recommend this little book to readers, because the dramatic story in the book is actually exploring the deepest problems of mankind. This book is rich in literary and philosophical values. Reading this book, unconsciously, you will also get a glimpse of the most important psychological development at present. 0 1, an uphill battle
This book does not boast about the records of concentration camps. The book contains nothing but the painful experiences of millions of prisoners in concentration camps. This is the inside story of a concentration camp, told by a survivor. The great horror has not been described many times in the book, but few people actually believe it. Just a lot of little torture. In other words, this book is trying to find the answer to this question: "What is it like for an ordinary prisoner to live in a concentration camp every day?"
Most of the events described in this book did not take place in famous large concentration camps, but in small concentration camps where killings were common. The story in the book is not the suffering of heroic martyrs, nor the life of "cool tyrants" or famous prisoners. It is not concerned with the suffering of powerful people, but with the suffering, abuse and death of many unknown and unknown prisoners. What the "cool bully" really despises is these ordinary prisoners with unmarked sleeves. They have almost no food to eat, but "cool bully" never knows what hunger is. In fact, many "cool tyrants" like their meals better during the camp than at other times in their lives. But their attitude towards prisoners is even harsher than that of guards; Fighting people is even harder than the Nazi advance team. Of course, the "cool bully" is carefully selected from many prisoners. Their personalities are just right for this cruel role; If the "work" is ineffective and has negative trust, it will be brushed off immediately. So they all worked hard, just like Nazi progressives and camp guards. Examples like this can also be measured by the same psychological point of view.
It is easy for outsiders to hold a sympathetic and sentimental misconception about life in concentration camps, but they are not very clear about the hardships of prisoners struggling to survive in concentration camps. This kind of struggle is a tough battle that we have to go all out for daily rations, for life itself, for ourselves or our friends.
02. Moral problems when struggling to survive.
Take changing camps as an example. The news of the camp change was officially released, ostensibly to transfer a group of prisoners to another prison camp. However, if you expect that this so-called "other camp" actually refers to the gas chamber, your guess can be said to be close. Prisoners who are sick and unable to work will be eliminated and sent to large concentration camps with gas chambers and crematoria. The method of elimination is to call all the prisoners to a team battle or a team battle. At that time, the most important thing for every prisoner was to try to exclude the names of himself and his friends from the blacklist-although everyone knew that saving people might be discovered. (Note: I personally think this sentence should be translated into: "Although everyone knows that every rescued person means another victim." )
Every time you change camps, there are always a certain number of prisoners to leave. However, since each prisoner is only a number, it doesn't matter much who leaves. When prisoners entered the concentration camp, their personal documents and other items had been confiscated (at least in Auschwitz), so everyone had the opportunity to give false names and occupations. Many people do this for various reasons. All the authorities care about is the number of prisoners. This number is tattooed on everyone's skin and embroidered somewhere in underwear. If a guard wants to "mess up" a prisoner, all he has to do is "glance" at the prisoner's number (this "glance" can teach us to be frightened), and he doesn't have to ask his name at all.
Anyway, the prisoners in the camp are unwilling and have no time to worry about moral or ethical issues when the camp is changed. There is only one thought in everyone's heart, that is, to find a way to save his friend in order to wait for his family to live. So he will not hesitate to try his best to get another person, another "number", to join the reform camp instead of him.
As I said before, the method of choosing "cool bully" is very negative. Only the most brutal prisoners will be selected for this job (although there are some lucky exceptions). However, in addition to being selected by the marching team, there is another way to volunteer among all prisoners around the clock. Generally speaking, only after years of migration, prisoners who struggle for survival without scruple, who can steal or rob or even betray their friends by hook or by crook in order to protect themselves, can survive. Those of us who survived by luck or miracle-whatever you say-know that none of our true elites have returned. Readers who read my autobiographical short stories often ask me to explain the theory of meaning therapy more comprehensively and directly. Therefore, in the first edition of this book, I added a short space to explain the research of meaning therapy. But even this would not be enough Many appeals surround me, hoping to make a more detailed explanation. Therefore, in this edition, I explained it more fully again.
But how difficult this job is! It is really impossible to introduce 14 materials written in German to readers in a short space. I remember an American doctor came to my clinic in Vienna and asked me, "Excuse me, doctor, are you a psychoanalyst?" I replied, "not exactly a psychoanalyst, but a psychotherapist!" " However, he continued to ask me, "So which school do you represent?" I replied, "I created this theory myself and called it" (meaningful therapy). " "So, can you tell me what the logotherapy study is in one sentence? He asked, "at least tell me the difference between psychoanalysis and meaningful therapy?" ""all right! " I said, "But first, would you please tell me the essence of psychoanalysis in one sentence?" Here is his answer: "In psychoanalysis, the patient should lie on the sofa and tell you something that is sometimes very annoying." So I immediately refuted him with the following impromptu sentence: "Alas! During logotherapy, the patient can sit up straight, but he has to listen to something that is sometimes very annoying. "
Of course, the above statement is a bit funny and cannot be used as an external explanation for the research of logotherapy. But there is also some truth. Compared with psychoanalysis, logotherapy is a method with less retrospection and introspection. Logotherapy pays attention to the future, that is, the work and significance that patients will complete in the future. At the same time, meaning therapy tries not to emphasize all the "vicious circle formation" and "feedback mechanism" because they are just enough to promote "neurosis". In this way, the typical egoism of neurotic patients collapses, and it is no longer beneficial to strengthen the deterioration.
Of course, the above description is too brief, but in logotherapy, patients will eventually encounter the problem of the meaning of life and re-explore. The definition of logotherapy law that I improvised above actually contains some truth. The psychopath tried to escape the topic of his life and was unwilling to try to understand it; If he wakes up and is clearly aware of his life problems, he can be inspired to overcome his neurosis.
Let me explain why I use the word "meaningful therapy" as my theoretical term. "Logos" is a Greek word which means "meaning". Logotherapy Method or the Third Vienna Psychotherapy School, as some scholars call it, focuses on "the meaning of human existence" and "the pursuit of human existence". According to the foundation of logotherapy Law, this attempt to pursue the meaning of life is a person's most basic motivation. Therefore, my "meaningful will" is very different from the "pleasure principle" emphasized by Freud's psychoanalysis and the "power will" emphasized by Adler's spiritual philosophy.
0 1, the will to seek meaning
What people seek for meaning is the original power in life, not the "constant rationalization" caused by "instinct drive" This meaning is unique and unique, and only people can and must practice it; Only by putting it into practice can we satisfy people's will to seek meaning. Some scholars think that the so-called meaning and value are just "defense mechanism", "reaction formation" and "sublimation"! But for me, I don't want to live just because of "psychological self-defense mechanism", and I'm not prepared to die because of "reaction". However, people can live or even die for their ideals and values.
A few years ago, France conducted a public opinion survey, and the results showed that 89% people admitted that they needed to speak out for certain factors. What's more, 6 1% people admit that they are willing to die for someone or something in their life. I used this questionnaire to test the staff and patients in clinics in Vienna, and the results were similar to those of thousands in France, with a gap of only 2%. In other words, the will to seek meaning is a "fact" rather than a "creed" for most people.
Of course, there will be some individual cases, and the values expressed are just a disguise of hidden internal conflicts. If so, they only represent some exceptions to the law and cannot be regarded as the law itself. In these cases, the explanation of psychodynamics can reveal the subconscious factors; And we must deal with its hypocritical values (the best example is the die-hards), so that we can unmask it and expose its truth. However, once faced with the true side of people (that is, the fact that people are eager for a more meaningful life, the better), they should immediately stop unmasking. If it is not stopped immediately, it is enough to show that the reporter intends to belittle the spiritual demands of others.