Frankl's "Man's search for meaning" possibly the most meaningless book!

 

Following recent analysis this book pops up as completely meaningless.

The method is SRH--which is well covered in the blog--and uses the generalised Godel statement. The argument being that Godel's proof is a particular example of a general issue with self-reference.

In the case of Frankl we note that if the reader doesn't already have meaning then it doesn't matter.

Another way to argue this is "what is the meaning of a search for meaning?"

If the search itself has meaning then you don't need to do the search. If the search does not have meaning then you can clearly operate without meaning.

SRH and Godel explodes any suggestion that meaning is necessary for life.

Now how much more profound is this realisation than anything in the book. Realising that we don't need meaning and that Frankl's book can go in the bin is liberation, while Frankl's book binds us to a tyrannical need and search for meaning and self validation.

Indeed the book is very much the result of trauma as Frankl tries to make sense of what happened to him. But being a Jew this is doubly hard as he is indoctrinated to believe that somehow God should ensure him meaning and a certain place in the universe. Such ideas are tyrannical and bind Jews to lives of struggle and unhappiness, and are a trap that stop then from being free.

So we need be very caution of things that attempt to make profound statements of the world. What on one hand looks like a support and walking stick, becomes on the other hand a bar in the cage that has us trapped and oppressed.