Man as Perceiver of His Culture and Environment

Sigmund Freud, the man who started psychoanalysis academy, was debunked by the

Victor Frankl. In his book, entitled, Mans Search for Meaning, he wrote his experiences

during the Second World War in which he was part of the Holocaust. He was sent to numerous

concentration camps and received countless of beatings and tortures, mentally, physically, and

spiritual. As a psychologist, he began to explain his experiences and behaviors through the lens

of a scientist. In his book, he debunked the view of Sigmund Freuds view of human actions that

is based on the subconscious mind and explained that actions is based through choices.

There were always choices to make. Every day, every hour, offered the opportunity to make a

decision, a decision which determined whether you would or would not submit to those powers

which threatened to rob you of your very self, your inner freedom; which determined whether or

not you would become the plaything of circumstance, renouncing freedom and dignity to become

molded into the form of the typical inmate. (Frankl, 1984)

Man according to Dr. Frankl is controlled and influenced by his/her environment,

circumstances, and experiences in his/her life. The choices that human make is not based on

his/her sexual desires or libido. The human being is completely and unavoidably influenced by

his surroundings the prisoner did not seem to concern himself with sex. (Frankl, 1984) The

lack of food and intense experience of trauma prevents human to look for sexual urges but the

fight for survival. And in this tug-of-war of control, human begin to choose whether he wants to

live or to finish his/her life.

According to Sigmund Freud, creative process is an alternative to neurosis or a mental

illness. In other words, art is produced through the ability of the artist to turn his/her fantasies
into artistic creations instead of into symptoms. To further simplify Freudians concept of art, art

is a defense mechanism of human to prevent him or her from developing a mental illness. This

principle is different from Victor Frankl, because according to his book, art is experienced

because of the events that happened to humans. The experiences that the prisoners had gone

through in the concentration camps made them appreciate art and nature as never before. The

mountains, sunset, fields of flowers, or beauty of nature carried them away from their present

situation. Songs, poems, jokes, and stories made them forget and help them cope up with their

situation.

As the inner life of the prisoner tended to become more intense, he also experienced the beauty

of art and nature as never before. Under their influence he sometimes forgot his own frightful

circumstances. (Frankl, 1984)

Humor or jokes is also different in the view of Frankl and Freud. Freuds concept of

humor is that the pleasure derived from telling or hearing a joke occurs in the unconscious, and

understanding what processes make the joke humorous, is in no way necessary for the joke to be

understood. Humor according to Frankl, is based on the concept of living. It is being made by

humans to cope up with their environment and to survive. It is not based on the unconscious, but

is based on the mere fact that choosing to live and facing the circumstances.

It is well known that humor, more than anything else in the human make-up, can afford an

aloofness and an ability to rise above any situation, even if only for a few seconds. The

attempt to develop a sense of humor and to see things in a humorous light is some kind of a trick

learned while mastering the art of living. Yet it is possible to practice the art of living even in a

concentration camp, although suffering is omnipresent. (Frankl, 1984)

 Mans environment is a major factor in his or her actions. His/her experiences and

circumstances will create a goal and meaning to his/her life. Victor Frankls experiences in a

concentration created a huge breakthrough in defining art and human behavior. His writings will

not be debunked because it was drawn from a personal testimony. Unlike Sigmund Freud who

studies behavioral pattern, Victor Frankl was a participant of his study and research. Therefore,

man perceives his environment as basis for his actions and behavior.

Filipino culture is often described as no originality, no identity, and no direction.

S. Lily Mendoza discussed that there were many theoretical advances in the study of the culture

of the Filipinos. Out of the western-introduced academic disciplines, three programs emerged,

which were Sikolohiyang Pilipino, Pilipinolohiya, and Pantayong Pananaw. They emerged

because of the endeavors of Virgilio G. Enriquez, Prospero R. Covar, Zeus A. Salazar, and Jaime

B. Veneracion. They were anthropology and history professors of the University of the

Philippines, who studied in the West to define the culture of the Filipinos because of these, they

looked for a different way of determining the culture of their country.

They aimed to produce a tradition of Filipino psychology whose goal of understanding is

from the Filipino people and not foreigners. Necessarily, this demands using their own language

to ensure that the process of narration to Filipino people will be more clearly understood by the

majority. If Filipino psychology were to prosper as a discipline, it should be borne of a true and

adequate understanding of their own culture.

For many years, western ideas dominated the school of thought in the field of culture

determination in the Philippines. This lead to confusion and distortions in the concept of the

Filipino identity. Because of the reality that only the well-off classes in the society can only avail

to study in top schools that teaches western train of thought, a huge division of the classes in
society happened. They called it, Great Cultural Divide. This division of classed led, according

to the author, to the slow progress of society and loss of identity to many Filipinos.

That was why, Filipino scholars created a theoretical framework that defines the culture

of the country not through the filter of the west but from the inside itself. They aimed to create a

framework of research in the eyes of the people who lived in the country regardless of group,

language, or class. They used the Filipino language to be the basis of the creation because, to

achieve unity and separation from the western theories.

Without a working knowledge and actual use of the language/s in which a culture is encoded,

no deep understanding of the same is possible The mandated adoption of the subject peoples

languages and perspectives in a powerful symbolic act of separation from the masters signifying

codes. [ CITATION Nav07 \l 13321 ]

Their concern is not to define the Filipino culture based on foreign theories, because they

believed that they irrelevant in studying the culture of the Philippines. Nevertheless, the way they

will define the culture are based on Filipino culture, Filipino society, and Filipino context.

Therefore, the indigenous beliefs and traditions will be included in their paradigm.

The study of the Philippines should be grounded in the national context. It should be

studied in the interest of the country and not on the benefit of the western cultures. The vantage

point of the researcher should be based on the peoples history, psychology, and society in which

he/she studies. The academic breakthrough will produce Filipino historians, psychologist,

anthropologists, etc. that studies the country not through the prejudice of the west but through the

context of the Filipinos as a whole. It will be from the perspective of the Filipinos with the

indigenous point of view.

References
Drobot, A. (2014). Freud File. Retrieved from AROPA:
http://www.freudfile.org/psychoanalysis/papers_9.html
Frankl, V. (1984). Man's Search for Meaning. Washington Square Press.
Navarro , A., & Lagbao-Bolante, F. (2007). Mga Babasahin sa Agham Panlipunang Pilipino:
Sikolohiyang Pilipino, Pilipinolohiya, at Pantayong Pananaw. THEORETICAL
ADVANCES IN THE DISCOURSE OF INDIGENIZATION, 241-297.
Popova, M. (1998). Viktor Frankl on the Human Search for Meaning. Retrieved from Brain
Pickings: http://www.brainpickings.org/2013/03/26/viktor-frankl-mans-search-for-
meaning/
Walsh, M. (2012). Art and Psychoanalysis. I.B. Taurus & Co Ltd.