by Marie Snyder
About 45 years ago, psychiatrist Irvin Yalom estimated that a good 30-50% of all cases of depression might actually be a crisis of meaninglessness, an existential sickness, and these cases require a different method of treatment. We experience this lack of purpose as boredom, apathy, or emptiness. We are “not told by instinct what one must do, or any longer by tradition what one should do. Nor does one know what one wants to do,” so we feel lost and directionless. Instead of addressing meaninglessness as the problem, though, we’ve been merely addressing the symptoms of it: addictions, compulsions, obsessions, malaise. In today’s context, it might suggest that even social media issues could be problems with a lack of meaning.
The last sentences of his lengthy tome, Existential Psychotherapy, sum up his solution: “The question of meaning in life is, as the Buddha taught, not edifying. One must immerse oneself in the river of life and let the question drift away.” How he lands here is an intriguing path through a slew of philosophers and psychiatrists. Even without symptoms of a problem, attention to meaning is necessary as it gives birth to values, which become principles to live by as we place behaviours into our own hierarchy of acceptability.
“One creates oneself by a series of ongoing decisions. But one cannot make each and every decision de novo throughout one’s life; certain superordinate decisions must be made that provide an organizing principle for subsequent decisions.”
Yalom doesn’t suggest coming up with a list of values that can become meaningful to us, but that we immerse ourselves in life to become more aware of which values we already have. Read more »
The second half of Frankl’s 
At the heart of French existentialism – and especially the version associated with its most famous representative, Jean Paul Sartre – was the notion of radical freedom. On this view, when we choose, we choose our values and thus what kind of person we are going to be. Nothing can prescribe to us what we ought to value, and the responsibility of freedom is to accept this fact of the human condition without falling into the ‘bad faith’ which would deny it. The moment of existentialism may have passed, but the view that we are radical choosers of our values persists in many quarters, and so I want to consider how well this idea holds up, and what an alternative to it might look like.