The Body Snatcher – Weighing Intent Against Action

Robert Louis Stevenson is known for his world-famous novels ‘Treasure Island’ and ‘Strange case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde’ . His short story called “The Body Snatcher” throws light on the mentality and evolution of the dangerous psychopaths. The false sense of greater good, the ability to ‘suppress destructive thoughts’, ‘destructive actions’ to justify superiority keeps driving certain types of criminals to cross the limits of humanity, ethics, morality. It shows that even though the consequences of wrong actions may not get punished due to the limitations of the laws of the respective times, the punishment of wrong thought is almost instant which is the degradation of the person’s psyche through ‘guilt’ and ‘fear’ – and most of the time it goes unnoticed and builds over time resulting in even more grave dangerous acts. It shows how thought and action are equally important in the overall personality. The wrong act may not get punished but the wrong thought has already punished the mind.

Robert Louis Stevenson’s famous short story “The Body Snatcher”

The difficulty of literature is not to write, but to write what you mean; not to affect your reader, but to affect him precisely as you wish.

Robert Louis Stevenson

In storytelling, especially in visual storytelling media, there is an expression – “Show! Don’t tell.” It is very impactful because it makes the viewers to put their minds consciously in the narrative thereby it increases their engagement in the story; this makes them to consider the narrative as their own story. The emotional impact is very high. It is furthermore potent if the story is horror or thriller. More the viewers feel engaged, more scared they will be.

But there are some stories especially, some unconventional crime stories where there is no point of relatability because not every one of us is a criminal, not every mind thinks the way given psychopath, criminal is thinking in the story. 

Now the impact of such stories is solely dependent on how they are written, expressed. The mastermind depicting, writing such stories knows that being a human we have all the tendencies of whatever good there is in the world and whatever bad there is in the world. It is just matter of which of those we give chance to flourish and which of those we suppress to make our ultimate personality. The master author uses that fine thread of slight ‘unnatural’ tendencies we have suppressed to make us simulate the real horrors the villains of his story would commit. These stories create impact and relatability through our urge to simulate the events to understand the end truth of the narrative. Inspiration from real events adds further more spice in such stories. (That is exactly why “Based on real incidents’ has remained an impactful (but still a cliché) opening for any horror story. We know that it’s a cliché but it creates a space in our minds that there could be a possibility of this happening in real life)  

R L Stevenson wrote one such short story which feels like a normal depiction of a crime but in the very last sentences the horror of the story unfolds thereby leaving the readers shocked and scared. We will deep dive into this famous story written by Robert Louis Stevenson.

The Body Snatcher – Synopsis

This is a story of two young men who studied in the school of medicine in Edinburgh in early 1800s.

Macfarlane is now a Doctor and Fettes – old drunken but literate man was his companion in the past academic times. The main story starts unfolding as Dr. Macfarlane and Fettes see each other after long time unexpectedly which revives the memories of their wrongdoings in their shared past at the school of medicine.

Being a good and sincere lad, Mr. Fettes gets the job of maintaining the dissecting room held by Mr. K_, the teacher of anatomy. Macfarlane was assistant to Mr. K_. So, Fettes and Macfarlane were responsible for ensuring the smooth demonstrations of anatomy to the class by Mr. K_. In order to ensure the duty and credibility, Fettes and Macfarlane had crossed the limits in the ways they would source such dead bodies. There comes a day when Fettes is shocked to find out that the dead body he received is of Jane Galbraith – a lady he met in a good health just a day before. He tries to bring sanity in this matter by asking Macfarlane but Macfarlane rejects that idea of identifying and informing Police about the possible murder because that suspicion opens the possibility that all the dead-bodies they receive for dissection in the class of anatomy are results of crimes thereby making them immediate criminals.

Here we come to know that whenever there is shortage of dead bodies, Fettes and Macfarlane went to dig out the graves in the graveyards around Edinburgh.

One day Fettes discovers that Macfarlane has one acquaintance called Gray who has some sort of control over the behaviour of Macfarlane as if Gray knew something really dark about Macfarlane and revealing it would jeopardize Macfarlane’s reputation. Gray uses this trick of black-mailing to have a feast on Macfarlane’s money even though Macfarlane was not into it.

Upon the passing of night, Fettes understands that Macfarlane took care of the Gray Problem when he sees the dead body of Gray as a new subject for the dissection class. Macfarlane himself delivers that body to Fettes and it is now clear that he himself murdered him. But there is no chance to inform authorities and bring more trouble for Fettes. Macfarlane is not bothered by all this and rather feels free as the axe of Gray no more exists on his neck. He ensures Fettes that its just a matter of time that these dreadful memories will fade away and they both will be on their way as if nothing happened.

Fettes feels the same but both Macfarlane and Fettes have the event of Gray etched on the back of their minds as they now consciously avoid any direct or indirect conversations leading to Gray.

One day due to the shortage of subjects for dissection they go on the ‘resurrection’ hunt to a graveyard to dig out a dead body of an old farmer lady. They take a halt before going on to the main task of ‘resurrection’. They are caught in rain and darkness when they start to remove the dead body of the lady from the grave. They load that body in their small, congested cart in darkness. The body lies partly on their shoulders, is bothering them and is shifting continuously due to the uneven roads.

The uneasy dark and rainy environment, the dogs following the cart makes Macfarlane uneasy as if someone, something unnatural is watching them. So, Macfarlane asks Fettes to light the lamp so that they can at least check the dead body and keep it, adjust it properly in the cart so that they would continue the journey. Upon lighting the lamp both Macfarlane and Fettes are shocked to discover that the dead body they retrieved from the grave of the old lady is a dead body of Gray – a dissected dead body of Gray.

Inspiration From Real Incident

William Hare (left) and William Burke (right)

Robert Louis Stevenson’s short story “The Body Snatcher” was published in December 1884 and was based on infamous and real “Burke and Hare Murders” in 1828. Burke and Hare were owners of a lodging facility. Burke and Hare committed 16 murders to supply dead bodies in exchange of money to Dr. Knox who used them for dissections. This event led Dr. Knox to lose his credibility and fame. Dr. Robert Knox was a famous anatomist of his time. He was not convicted because he was not directly involved in the dealings of the dead bodies from Burke and Hare. Burke was hanged in public and Hare got immunity because he supported the state’s evidences and testified against Burke.   

The way in which R L Stevenson knitted the story is what made the story interesting. He calls the anatomist doctor Mr. K_ when the readers had an informed notion of Burke and Hare Murders and Dr. Knox in those times. So, it makes the readers to find out themselves that mystery around “Mr. K_”. Mr. K_ of the story is no other than Dr. Knox of Edinburgh.  

Psychopathic Tendencies – How Criminals Justify Their Crimes

For any average person, committing single murder is a huge, seemingly unnatural, inhumane and in the end an illegal act to fully commit. The consequences are dangerous. Then how come Burke and Hare committed 16 repetitions of this crime? They were just some small business owners.

In similar sense, Mr. Fettes and Mr. Macfarlane were just students of medicine and were doing their duties to ensure the supply of subjects for dissections. What made them to go on the streak of multiple illegal activities in the story? They were just doing their due diligence to Mr. K_.

Upon looking at the depths of the investigation of Burke and Hare Murder Case we will find that the first time they sold a dead body was for totally different reason. One of their lodgers died of old age while leaving a debt of 4 Sterling Pounds. Burke and Hare decided to sell the dead body to settle the debt. Note that dead bodies in those times were scarce for dissection and demonstration. They sold the body to Dr. Knox’s Private Anatomy School. Professor Doctor was not directly involved in the dealing. Burke and Hare received 7 Sterling Pounds for the body.

From hereon they decided to take the control of people’s lives for such beneficial business of dead bodies and started murdering the people who lodged in their facility. They killed 16 people in this way to deal for money in exchange of dead bodies. The careless murder they committed was to kill a beggar with clubfoot and his dead body was easily identified by a student due to this disability which made him to limp. Knox is said to make that body unidentifiable by removing the head and feet.

They had differences in their partnership which made them to split these acts for themselves. During an attempt to forcefully shift the lodgers to Hare’s establishment, Burke killed a lady and the lodgers who were shifting found the body while they returned to retrieve their belongings from Bare’s establishment. This was reported to Police but the dead body was already sold.

Looking at these events you will see that it is the rejection of morality and false sense of greater good and self-betterment which drives the criminal to commit the crime again and again. Burke and Hare got involved in these acts for the monetary benefits where it was easy to bypass the system and provisions like Dr. Knox’s anatomy demonstrations. Dr. Knox was driven to improve his credibility by flaunting his skills and demonstrations of dissections in the medical community.

R L Stevenson took this fine thread of reality to create Mr. Fettes and Mr. Macfarlane in his story. We will see that Mr. Fettes is shocked when he identifies a dead body of the lady he just met, that too in good health. Mr. Fettes had raised concern to Macfarlane but as Macfarlane was experienced and conditioned knowing that dead bodies once dissected were beyond any identification and legal jurisdiction. Actually, being a student of medicine, Macfarlane was expected to have a sense of the importance of life for any human being. The false sense that this will not get discovered by anyone practically and all of this was being done to maintain the reputation of his teacher thereby improving his credibility created a false sense of greater good in Macfarlane.

There is a section in this story where Macfarlane expresses how he feels about all these matters of dead bodies and Gray’s murder. He expresses following to Fettes in the story –  

“The great thing is not to be afraid. Now, between you and me, I don’t want to hang-that’s practical; but for all cant, Macfarlane, I was born with a contempt. Hell, God, Devil, right, wrong, sin, crime, and all the old gallery of curiosities- they may frighten boys, but men of the world, like you and me, despise them. Here’s to the memory of Gray!”    

The way he says all this shows that his mind has developed a false sense of greatness to justify his wrong-doings. Now he wants to prove his manliness. It’s like a defense mechanism to cover all the guilt which comes from committing such crimes. The criminal considers the motivations behind his criminal acts are way superior than the moral weight of what is right and what is wrong. (The word ‘CANT’ use in expression “for all cant” means a criminal act, deceitful act, falsehood. Macfarlane very well knew that what he was doing was a crime.)

In case of Burke and Hare it started with settling the debt for ensuring proper monetary gains for stable business of lodging. Then it snowballed into series of murders because they were never caught in action and had a way to come out of the murders. They created that ‘ecosystem’.

Same ecosystem can be seen in this story.

What could have actually made difference is the sense of reality and integrity. Integrity is the behavior which we carry when no one is watching. Fettes had chance to expose all this system when he discovered the young Lady’s dead body. But only because he felt that this action came with lot of difficult consequences and impossible to favor him in the end, he keeps mum.

Fettes found that exposing Macfarlane and Mr. K_ and getting them punishment is the most impractical and impossible event – the inevitable and that is where he made his first mistake. He went with the flow, the wrong one.  

The same would be the case for Burke and Hare. They could have asked authorities for the settlement of the debt from the old dead lodger. But, considering it a tedious route they considered the ill- route to sell it.

However difficult it may seem; impractical it may seem there is always a right way to do right things. The environment in which you are deciding your action is also playing a huge role in your choices. First helplessness shows you the path, then guilt follows and in order to mask that guilt the person creates a sense of greatness which demands sacrifices. This is real and constant in every generation of humanity. Most of the times right things are the toughest one to act on and accept.   

Stevenson beautifully brought these human tendencies in his story which go hand in hand with the reality we live even today.

The Ending Of The Story – Real Or Supernatural?

What hangs people…is the unfortunate circumstance of guilt.

Robert Louis Stevenson

Many readers argue that the ending is supernatural and spooky.  Robert Louis Stevenson in a masterful way maintains the realism of the story till the end. And in the last few closing sentences he mentions dead and dissected body of Gray which was completely destroyed many days ago in the reality of Fettes and Macfarlane. It is practically impossible for a body completely dissected to show itself in deep grave at completely different location. So that body definitely was not of dead Gray.

There are evidences to support this. Before going to the ‘resurrection’ job, Fettes and Macfarlane had stay in Fisher’s Tryst where they had drinks. So, it’s pretty much possible that whatever happened was under the influence of alcohol.

There is one more doubt that if it was real then at least one of them would have noticed the reality of the dead body. How can two men would have a shared delusion? A shared delusion can only be explained by a supernatural intervention.

The justification to opt out shared delusion is the shared guilt Fettes and Macfarlane had. It is a human tendency to make sense out of bunch of things which don’t make sense collectively when conditions are hostile. This sense is heightened when one is in hyperalert state, when one is in full fight or flight mode. Deep down Macfarlane knew the acts he is performing. The surrounding events just fuelled this sense of guilt and Stevenson beautifully created this environment in the minds of the readers.

You will notice that Macfarlane is completely unsettled and repulsive of minor things happening to him once they load the dead body. He hates the jumps that the body makes while going on an uneven track, he hates that ice-cold sackcloth flapping on his face, dogs following the cart on the road is unsettling to him (in reality we all know dogs would follow every vehicle going through their territory, especially in night), he also feels that the body has grown in shape (how would he know this if there was not enough light, as the lamp was not working?).

In this exact moment Stevenson injects this sentence for us readers which is a money shot –

“…and it grew and grew upon his mind that some unnatural miracle had been accomplished, that some nameless change had befallen the dead body, and that it was in fear of their unholy burden that the dogs were howling”

“The unholy burden” they both were carrying was the guilt they had suppressed long ago and not acted on it in rightful manner.    

This guilt and intoxication are the main reasons behind the spooky conclusion of the story.

What Should Be Punished – The Action Or The Intent?

The Body Snatcher as a story and even the reality of Burke and Hare crime to which it is associated poses a very interesting question. What are the limits of judicial system, law and order?  

As this statement from Kant goes, in order to be called a criminal in the eyes of the public, one must be seen to perform the crime or the evidences should support so. Thus ‘Law’ becomes more of a sociological term – ‘to arrest the degradation of human as a society’. On the other hand, Kant beautifully highlighted the unitary role of a person in the society. Simple logic says how a society is made of many ‘individuals’ coming together to interact for mutual benefit. Kant consciously asks for preservation of rights of others while achieving benefit otherwise society collapses (what is beneficial for one will not necessarily always be beneficial to others.) Which is why ethics prevent the degradation of the person on individual level. That is exactly where morality and integrity become more influential.    

So, even though our generalized and biased, conditioned thinking makes us to weigh the wrong acts heavier than just their thinking about doing them, in the end they both weigh the same. Sometimes, even though these thoughts don’t get in the fruition of realised actions, they keep on affecting minor, seemingly insignificant decisions we make which ultimately create our personality and our psyche. Act of crime and thought of committing the same crime are same.

Friedrich Nietzsche posed this same dilemma of “what weighs heavy – action or intent?” in his book “Beyond Good and Evil”. I have discussed that in depth in the section “The Freedom of Actions” in my other blog post “The Free Spirit – Beyond Good and Evil “.

The gist of the things is that we will be able to appreciate the crime of ill-thinking when the stakes are really high as in any decision would have grave dangerous scale of destruction. If we will wait for the actions to be presented as wrong while we already know that it leads to wrong then even the thought of doing that action was wrong in the first place, even before the action’s ends were realized.

The Real Punishment – Where And How Does It Happen?

So, now that I have established that even the thought of doing wrong action is a crime then, one would definitely say that I must be a fool.  Every one of us is always thinking of such ideas all the time – consciously and unconsciously. (Not of murdering someone obviously. Just recall the last time you cursed someone because they made your life miserable, or the thought that why bad things always happen with good people – especially ME!)

The answer is “It is really easy to fool our mind”. This is also where the core of the fiction in Robert Louis Stevenson’s short story The Body Snatcher and the reality of ‘Burke and hare Crime’ is overlapping.

Burke and Hare thought that their crimes were justified because of the profits of their business. Fettes and Macfarlane thought that their acts were justified for their survival and reputation.

Deep down they were completely engulfed in the guilt of their wrongdoings. So, if we follow the before-explained thought of Immanuel Kant, we will see that real actions from law will ensure realistic punishment but the punishment of the mind is instant, the guilt is injected immediately. This guilt if is “real”, it will immediately start eroding your personality and psyche. Which will eventually lead to unnatural events and acts of crime in real world.

I am saying the feeling of guilt to be “real”, because (again) it is really easy to fool our mind. One has to train mind to distinguish the difference between impulses, responses and their encouragement or suppression. One will realize that whenever there is suppression of wrong thought like guilt in this case, it leads to the defense mechanism – creating a cover up with false sense of greater good or the false security of not getting caught in action, on not having enough evidences. Even though they are not caught in society, the guilt has already passed its sentence on their personality, their self-image and psyche. Now such persons have just accepted what they have become. (This is how a psychopath would start their journey to justify all their crimes).  

I am posing this also from the other perspective of ‘false-guilt’. Sometimes we consider ourselves guilty when in reality we were not responsible for those events. This false guilt will start taking even the good things you have.

The only way I see to handle any wrong thought is to not let it grow out of its own boundary of creation, not to feed it further. Not to mask it or suppress it but just let it remain there. The overgrowth and flourishing of good thoughts will eventually diminish its influence. It’s natural to have right or wrong thoughts for given stimulus. Response, reaction lies in our territory. You must understand that even the act of suppression demands extra efforts which requires extra involvement, this extra involvement is unconsciously feeding that wrong thought, thus suppression on mental level is not suppression rather it’s a feed. Which exactly what we keep on missing when judging between an action and its mere thought.    

Egg Or Chicken? – Action Or Thought?

You will appreciate the dilemma created due the practical limitations of the world we live in. As it is really difficult to enter immediately into the mentality, psyche of the others – we have to always go by the external attributes of everyone around us to measure the rightness or wrongness. That is why act imposing guilt must also be supported by the thought of guilt. This is very important when the psyche, the mind of person is not normal or completely evolved. So, one may think that the importance of ill-intent is less important, it also plays equally important role in judiciary decisions.

In court, the thing we punish is the criminal intention. -the mens rea, the guilty mind. There is an ancient rule: actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea – “the act does not create guilt unless the mind is also guilty.” That is why we do not convict children, drunks, and schizophrenics: they are incapable of deciding to commit their crimes with a true understanding of the significance of their actions. Free will is as important to the law as it is to religion or any other code of morality.

William Landay, Defending Jacob

Conclusion

Robert Louis Stevenson is known for his world-famous novels Treasure Island and Strange case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. The short story called “The Body Snatcher” throws light on the mentality and evolution of the dangerous psychopaths. The false sense of greater good, the ability to ‘suppress destructive thoughts’, ‘destructive actions’ to justify superiority keeps driving certain types of criminals to cross the limits of humanity, ethics, morality. It shows that even though the consequences of wrong actions may not get punished due to the limitations of the laws of the respective times, the punishment of wrong thought is almost instant which is the degradation of the psyche through ‘guilt’ and ‘fear’ – and most of the time it goes unnoticed and build over time resulting in even more grave dangerous acts. It shows how thought and action are equally important in the overall personality of a person. The wrong act may not get punished but the wrong thought has already punished the mind.    

References-

The Existence – Why? How? And What?

Logotherapy is not intended only to search for the purpose of life. It justifies and dignifies the human life for its capabilities to remain in the ebb and flow of existence which is the only real thing amongst the infinite yet unrealized possibilities in the universe.

Part 2 – Viktor Frankl’s Logotherapy for Humanity

“Was du erlebst, kann dir kein Gott mehr rauben.”

(No god can rob you of what you experience.)

Robert Hamerling

Answers from Logotherapy

In the Part 1 of the post, we tried to touch some ideas like – “three schools of psychology”, Freudian “will to pleasure”, Adlerian “will to power”, Viktor Frankl’s “will to meaning” as in Logotherapy, “existential vacuum”, “Noö-dynamics”, “determinism according to Logotherapy”, “Freedom according to Logotherapy” and “the responsibility that comes with the freedom”

In summary, Viktor Frankl a holocaust survivor, psychiatrist by profession witnessed and experienced the extremes of the human psyche leading to the creation of the concrete foundations of Logotherapy. According to logotherapy, it is the meaning, the purpose – which makes a man to survive through any situations in life, especially the worst ones. When there were not chances to become powerful, when there were no means to gain pleasure even then people chose to go through the hardships/ sufferings – they chose life. Not only to survival but even upon the realization of death, people accepted that death in same way one would have accepted the life. They had something inside them which made sense out of the sufferings, pain, life and even death. This “sense” was the purpose they had identified for themselves to serve. This purpose, this meaning to their own life justified the sufferings they endured which created the hope for their survival and justification to the death for the people who accepted it with dignity.  

Noö-genic neurosis is that existential blockage rather vacuum where a person’s mind itself is unsettled because it has no justification, no sense, no meaning behind the activities, decisions to live through the life. Upon realization of the real freedom, a person (and not the conditions, the objects around him) can determine his fate even in worst conditions; the person can still have that “optimal behavior”. This realization of freedom is possible because human psyche seeks for the sense of the things, the meaning, the purpose.  This freedom also calls for the sense of responsibility because human life practically has limited span, is perishable which brings that urgency to achieve the best possible outcome, the optimal outcome out of the only life one has. Responsibility brings the best out of the freedom one has; without the sense of responsibility, freedom degenerates into arbitrariness, a diffused state where the outcomes of the event have no significant impact. In simple words, freedom with responsibility gives focused and optimal outcomes whereas freedom without responsibility (still) gives results but are diffused as there is no intent to achieve anything.  

Why? Why does the life bear “a meaning”, “a purpose”?

Upon understanding what actually lies under the human psyche and the human life (i.e., the purpose, the meaning), it becomes apparent to ask the same existential question – Why does life seek for meaning only as there can be other uncountable possibilities, uncountable factors which drive the psyche, the life, the existence? Why nothing in the world – the universe but meaning only?

Viktor Frankl has excellently given the theoretical and practical proofs for the importance of meaning in a person’s life. Theoretically proof – if a person is always driven by pleasures and power then why there are examples where people chose sacrifice, where people died for their honor, where people stood fearlessly for their morals, where people rose against something really powerful, where people accepted the hardships even when there was no guarantee for them to end? These are not the exceptional cases in a human behavior. Rather when human beings are stretched to their extremes these behaviors are more common. So, unlike the pleasure and power the awareness, the urge to find the meaning is not just a secondary drive of the human life. The urge to the meaning, the purpose will always be present even in the absence of pleasure and power.

Practically Viktor Frankl presents a study to prove his point here. 89% people from a French public opinion poll and 78% of the people in an American students’ statistical survey indicated that people want “something to live for”, “finding a purpose and meaning to the life”.

I think, it is the omnipotent nature of the infinite possibilities which the real freedom grants to every person. Out of those infinite possibilities very few become realized to reality from where the freedom loses its ideal nature. Then the superposition of realized possibilities create the “real” reality which has been brought from chaos, an inconceivable, an un-understandable situation to a familiar, slightly better predictable state. This better predictable, the one “out of which some sense can be made” state is the fundamental state required for the human life to thrive upon. This urgency for predictability, for sense, for meaning, for purpose is solely because of the limited nature of the realization of life we have.

(The word predictability is not used here to imply that man wishes for everything to happen according to his wishes, rather the predictability is used in the sense for how a person will always know how he will react to the events presented to him even when they are not predictable.)

Does that mean that if a person becomes immortal, will the urge for purpose – the will to meaning ceases to exist? That is where responsibility comes into picture which Viktor Frankl has posed while defining freedom’s role in human life. Only with responsibility can the freedom be brought to the realization to possibilities out of the infinite unrealized possibilities.

In single sentence I think, a single realized possibility is more powerful than the infinite unrealized possibilities. The extraction of this power is only possible if the there is freedom with a responsibility. That is why the life exists; it exists to create the realized possibilities out of the infinite unrealized possibilities (which the universe holds or whatever ultimate there is can generate).   

How? How one discovers the purpose

The profoundness of Frankl’s logotherapy is not just about the depth of the ideas and the practicality of the experimental results. He also explained how one gains this meaning, which are as follows:

Ways to discover Meaning of Life-

  1. Creating a work or doing a deed
  2. By experiencing something or encountering someone
  3. By the attitude we take toward unavoidable suffering

1. Creating a work or doing a deed

It is very similar to figuring out what you actually love doing and how you can also benefit others (obviously including you) in the process. (Some call it following your passion, answering your inner calling to create something that you and others value)

2. By experiencing something or encountering someone – Power of love

“The second way of finding a meaning in life is by experiencing something – such as goodness, truth and beauty- by experiencing nature and culture or, last but not least, by experiencing another human being in his very uniqueness- by loving him.”

Viktor Frankl

The meaning of Love itself became very “meaningful” to me when I understood what the logotherapy stands for. Before stumbling upon the ideas of Viktor Frankl on “the meaning”- for me love was a selfish idea to gain pleasure, to have that comfort for ourselves. Something which goes like this:

“We never love anyone. What we love is the idea we have of someone. It’s our own concept – our own selves – that we love.”

Fernando Pessoa

Love is very selfish idea if we go by this statement. For me here, Pessoa meant that love emerges from inside, hence it is very “egoic” It gives us pleasure to love someone, to do everything to make them happy which ultimately will make us happy, thereby becoming selfish in the end. But then my perspectives changed. (I haven’t studied and understood the premise and the intentions behind the Pessoa’s comment on love here, which can be reserved for discussion somewhere else.)

Upon going through the ideas on Logotherapy, we become aware that there are examples where lovers (not the romantic ones only) have crossed the limits of life for other people or other things, where (again) pleasure and power were not guaranteed.

Love thus becomes a medium to realize the possibilities of the life experiences. If we are so obsessed to find the meaning of our life, then it equally becomes very meaningful to have someone who understands the same urge for meaning in you too. This love is not just a person-to-person possibility, it can also be for things and experiences.

“Friendship is unnecessary, like philosophy, like art… It has no survival value: rather it is one of those things which give value to survival.” 

C S Lewis

This is the reason you will always see why almost all the events, experiences, art forms, philosophies, cultures, religions and whatnot are immediately linked to the concept of love. It’s on a whim where things not making sense are illogically explained by love, it is innate fact in everyone which logotherapy makes apparent.

3. By the attitude we take toward unavoidable suffering

The third way one can realize the worth of life is by going through sufferings. Sufferings stretch a person to his extremes where there are clear boundaries between the existences of life and death. The urgency to make the existence of some worth becomes eminent here. The meaning discovered in such situations pushes the person to bring even the hopeless situations to his benefit by developing an attitude of optimism. The inability to change the situations makes the person change himself to bring the best out of the situation. It the way in which the person finds the meaning to his suffering.

“Suffering ceases to be suffering at the moment it finds a meaning.” 

Viktor Frankl

It is also important to understand that if suffering gives the person meaning for the life that also does not mean that everyone has to suffer to find the meaning in his own life. Viktor Frankl was very clear in these terms. Hence, he clarified the earlier two ways to find the meaning in life. The ideas communicated by Viktor Frankl are very similar to the ideas in stoicism which also discusses about focusing on things which you can control.

What? What is life according to the logotherapy?

The logotherapy explains that life is all about the tragedies, in Viktor’s words the tragic triad of three things namely pain, Guilt and Death. Why tragedies are considered to represent life is important here.  It is very easy for life to exist when these three things (pain, guilt, death) are not there, but the life still remains existent rather becomes more meaningful in the presence of the same hostile aspects. Logotherapy thus discusses that even in such hostile conditions, one can find the meaning, one can have the “optimal behavior” by following ways in the words of Viktor himself as follows:   

  1. Pain – Turning suffering into a human achievement and accomplishment.
  2. Guilt – Deriving from guilt the opportunity to change oneself for better.
  3. Death – deriving from life’s transitoriness an incentive to take responsible action.

1. Pain

Logotherapy made a successful attempt to justify what is the real nature of pleasure and pain. It established a fact that life is not just a set of tragic events of sadness for someone and a series full of happiness for others. Life is about how we as a person create meaning out of our sufferings, even when they are not in control. This is the real victory over those sufferings. Logotherapy actually balanced the concepts of happiness and sadness which both are the inseparable aspects of every life. One of them is always favored (happiness) but the realization of meaning makes the least favorable yet existent (sadness) a reality. This is very effective when people are sad even in their pursuits of happiness. They expect that doing one specific thing will bring them happiness, make them feel accomplished. After doing that thing, achieving that thing they again become clueless and sad that it was not what they expected.  

“Happiness cannot be pursued; it must ensue. A human being is not in the pursuit of happiness but rather in search of a reason to become happy, last but not least, through actualizing the potential meaning inherent and dormant in a given situation.”

Viktor Frankl

When people get overwhelmed upon the realization that happiness is not consistent for their whole life the existential vacuum peaks in and again this meaninglessness becomes dominant. Frankl effectively established that this forced urge to become happy is one of the major reasons for the depression, aggression and addiction in the newer generations.

2. Guilt

Frankl here gives one of his professional experiences with the convicted criminals- the guilty people of the society.  According to his ideas from personal experiences which are really powerful- every crime cannot be traced back to single point event, single person, single cause, single behavior. If it is impossible to pinpoint and press conviction on such singular aspects, then how can a person be considered completely guilty for the crime. For such human beings rather every person feeling guilty about something life is about rising above it. Even though Viktor’s examples are based on criminal and convicted human beings, it will be an understatement that they are not applicable to everyone of us. Every one of us considers themselves guilty for at least one thing, one mistake in their life. Finding the purpose, the meaning can help us to rise above this guilt with the feeling of responsibility. What a powerful thought!

Humanness in everyone is one important aspect of logotherapy. Rising above guilt through realization of meaning reflects that. It made the psychology more humanitarian rather that a mechanistic interaction between humans and their drives.

3. Death

We have already discussed that the perishable nature of life creates the urgency to meaning. The sense of death brings in the responsibility to optimally live the only life one has is an important aspect of every human life rather every life. 

“The opportunities to act properly, the potentialities to fulfill a meaning, are affected by the irreversibility of our lives.”

Viktor Frankl

This is where I think we can understand what actually lies under the existence of life. Our existence as a conscious life is destined to create the realities from the infinite possibilities that universe has. We are the means to bring the intangible possibilities into the reality through our lives which makes every life meaningful. Every life is meaningful and hence deserves dignity. It is dignified because by its mere existence it has successfully created the realities out of the unrealized and intangible possibilities. Our existence itself makes us dignified of the life we have even if it may not be useful for others.    

“An incurably psychotic individual may lose his usefulness but yet retain the dignity of a human being.”

Viktor Frankl

This is also the moment where Viktor has highlighted on creating real possibilities in present rather than dwindling on to past and future. Past is more important because it is where the reality existed, it is where the meaning of actions from the present are justified.

The Super-meaning – why does the meaning exist?

“What is demanded of man in not, as some existential philosophers teach, to endure the meaninglessness of life, but rather to bear his incapacity to grasp its unconditional meaningfulness in rational terms. Logos is deeper than logic.”

Viktor Frankl

It is also very important to understand that Viktor Frankl’s Logotherapy is not just about finding the sense to the life, the meaning the purpose of the life. It also makes one important argument about the limitations of human understandings. When we will go on asking “why?” to the answers of every “why?”, we will end up into some abstract idea of meaning which won’t even make sense to our existence. (And again, the same spiral of existential vacuum will start thereby rendering the question useless itself) even though there are some things which are beyond your understandings that also does not mean that your meaning should always justify unknowns, rather it is paradoxical. If the purpose of life is to create the realities from the intangible, unrealized infinite possibilities then it is very important to understand that the meaning need not to be some abstract meaning in order to justify every possibility in the universe. Logotherapy thus becomes very powerful to create a practical, real picture and purpose of human life. Logotherapy thus justifies and dignifies the human life for its capabilities to be there even in the ebb and flow of existence which is the only real thing amongst the infinite yet unrealized possibilities.

For more, read Part 1 of this blog post- Answering the questions on existence of “the existence” – Viktor Frankl’s Logotherapy for Humanity – Part 1

  • Featured Image – Jewish Museum Berlin