I AM FREE TO DETERMINE THE MEANING OF MY LIFE

Do we have free will or is our actions fundamentally predetermined external to our will?

This is one of the most controversial questions that have riddled numerous philosophers since the

beginning of time. The discussion between free will and determinism is complex; both

arguments engage our minds to truly dissect ones action whether we are genuinely free or

predestined.

There are proponents of the belief that man is predetermined and freedom is merely an

illusion. Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, is not technically a philosopher, although

his contribution in the field of psychology is consistent with the principle that man is

predetermined. For Sigmund Freud, all our actions and decisions is a product of both our

subconscious and conscious mind1. Sometimes the manner in which we may decisions is in the

foreground of our mind; it is apparent and clear to the individual thinker. At other times, our

subconscious aspect of our mind dictates our decisions, and the influence of our subconscious

occasionally becomes noticeable in so-called Freudian slips: verbal or memory mistakes that are

believed to be linked to the unconscious mind.2 This idea that man is determined in such a way

that every action which he takes in his life can be explained with some sort of mental process

going on his brain is not limited to Freuds understanding alone. In fact, the field of psychology

is constantly seeking more explanations to comprehend human behavior.

However, a different insight was had by neurologist Viktor Frankl as to human freedom.

He was one of those unfortunate enough to suffer inside one of the concentration camps during

1 http://www.iep.utm.edu/freud/#H5

2 What is a Freudian slip? Source:

http://psychology.about.com/od/sigmundfreud/f/freudian-slip.htm
the reign of Adolf Hitler. He was able to survive the ordeal and retold his experiences in the

concentration camp. In his work Mans Search for Meaning, Vikot Frankl says:

We, who lived in concentration camps, can remember the men who walked

through the huts comforting others, giving away their last piece of bread. They may have

been few in number, but they offer sufficient proof that everything can be taken from a

man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms to choose ones attitudes in any

given set of circumstances, to choose ones own way

During his time in the concentration camps, Frankl observed to groups of people. The first set are

those who slowly wither away, with eyes becoming listless and hopeless who die from sheer

starvation, sickness and depression. The second set are those who have chosen to cling to hope,

have chosen to share food and console their fellow prisoners. The second set of people is the

focus of Viktor Frankls study because they defied the standards of psychology. They have

remained hopeful that they will overcome their trial despite being in a situation that is devoid of

hope. The entrance of the death camp in Auschwitz were the gates of Hell for the victims of the

Holocaust, and as in Dante Alighieris Divine Comedy, hell is where all hope is abandoned. Yet

somehow, there were people in these concentration camps that have hope. This is what Viktor

Frankl attributes to the inherent freedom inside a person: a person has the freedom to determine

the meaning of his life. The person is not a product of his subconscious or conscious. He is not a

mere product of the circumstances and the environment around him. Human freedom cannot be

conveniently and neatly explained by psychological principles.

Jean Paul Sartre also discusses the concept of facticity and freedom. When we say

facticity, this refers to some of the basic truths that the human being is thrown in from the

moment he is born into this world. The place we are born in, the body we are born in, our
parents, these are all facticities that the human being cannot change. For example, a person can

be born with a congenital heart disease. He may undergo treatment and may eventually get

better, but the fact does not change: he is born with a birth defect. However, despite the different

facticities that converge into the individual human being, Sartre says that the human being has

the capacity to transcend these things. These circumstances do not determine us. The human

being is not a thing crushed into its own essence. A rock will remain a rock, an orange tree will

bear orange fruit but the human being is something entirely different: He is free to choose

different possibilities in his life. He has the freedom to choose the direction and meaning of his

life. To continue with the earlier example, a person who is born with a birth defect can choose to

objectify himself: I am abnormal, I am a victim of unfortunate circumstances. But on the other

hand, he can transcend his own situation, he can say to himself: My life is meaningful, my life is

worth living and nothing in the world can take away the fact that I value my life.

I submit that there is free will rather than determinism. Man is not an object but rather a

subject. He is not bound by the circumstances that he is in but he is entirely free to project

towards his future and he is free to give meaning to his various facticities that surround him.

Aside from what Sartre has discussed, we can see this exercise of freedom of meaning in our

common human experience. We hear of people having everything and yet fail to see the joy in

their possession. We hear of people having little in life and yet engage with life with much

energy and vibrancy, just as how the prisoners of the concentration camp chose to cling to hope.

Free will cannot be taken from us and it is a powerful aspect of a persons life in the sense that it

is the person alone who sets the tone for his life.