What did Viktor frankl consider to be the two classes of people?
156504
>>Though Logotherapy does not focus on helping the patients to regain his belief in God but time and again this is just what occurs, unintended and unexpected as it is. Frankl stated, "It is the business of existential analysis (Logotherapy) to furnish and to adorn as far as possible the chamber of immanence, while being careful not to block the door to transcendence." The Logotherapist has an "open-door policy." Through this door that is left ajar, the religious person can go out unhindered. Conversely the spirit of true religious feelings has free entrance. For the spirit of true religious feelings requires spontaneity. It appears that this "open-door policy" as well as the fact that quite often a person's faith is renewed during Logotherapy is based upon the fundamental assumptions of Logotherapy which form a chain of interconnected links: 1) Freedom of Will, 2) Will to meaning, and 3) Meaning to life. ***** 1) FREEDOM OF WILL: Frankl said that there are two classes of people who maintain that man's will is not free: Schizophrenic patients suffering from delusions that their will is manipulated and their thoughts controlled by other and along side them, deterministic philosophers. Under deterministic philosophers, he includes philosophers, psychologist, theologians, and other who hold to a deterministic view of human beings. The later often admit that we are experiencing our will as free, but this, they say, is self deception. Psychoanalysis has often been blamed for its so-called pan-sexualism. Frankl states that there is an aspect of Psychoanalysis that is even more erroneous and dangerous: that of pan-determinism. By that Frankl means the view of man that disregards his capacity to take a stand toward any conditions whatsoever. Man is not fully conditioned or determined; he determines himself whether to give in to conditions or stand up to them. In other words, man is ultimately self-determining. Man does not simply exist, but always decided what his existence will be, what he will become in the minute. By the same token, every human being has the freedom to change at any instant.<<\n\nMore can be found here:
843539
I found something for Wang Ming as two separate words-someone's name. The website below has a more complete description, but here is a quote to summarize him," the label given by Mao to Wang as a representative of dogmatism, subjectivism and sectarianism hits the nail on the head. "  Perhaps with this information, you can reread the reference to a computer guru and see if this definition fits.
90332
Hmm, does someone have a politcal theory midterm coming up?\n\nKant was largely a predecessor to Marx/Engels and was critisizing the same social structures they work and their inevitable ends of ruin. \n\nMachiavelli on the other hand was an advocate of the totalitarian ideal. Force makes right, but the quite "The ends justifies the means.", in itself is not correct. Even Niccolo would not entirely agree with that. \n\nTheir deep philophies are much to deep to get into because they were largely addressing different periods in political history.  Machiavelli was witnessing Roman decline and revolution, while Kant was witnessing the rise of the industrial revolution and its impacts upon the masses. \n\nIs there a specific topic you were intrested in like free will? social revolution or something?
271894
He was both to different people. There is no accurate answer to it.
3425
Joe Schmo had its origin in Frankl's book, which had its origins in Auschwitz. He was an average person and everyone with the face of anyone that didn't stand out.
200782
Rudolph Virchow?\n\nhttp://scienceworld.wolfram.com/biography/Virchow.html\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Virchow
205556
I'm not sure what the first one is, but I think the second one might be fascism
482511
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the first group; there was less competition there." \nIndira Gandhi (1917 - 1984)
630632
Might be Freud.  He has "the look" of a turn of the century German.
835632
Any attempts for people to decide what life is worth more than another falls under the catagory of eugenics.  The philosophy brought mainstream from the Nazi party.
314668
- A world citizen (maybe a little cliché)\n\n- A pan-nationalist (made that one up, like it?)\n\n- A globalist (could get you misunderstood though)\n\n- A cosmopolitanist (just found that on Wikipedia)\n\n- An anti-nationalist (logical enough)\n\n- An internationalist (also logical although kind of Communist)
760977
Try this website for information on and comparisons of the theories of Maslow and Alderfer:\n\nhttp://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/regsys/maslow.html
19733
The most modern or civilized in all aspects; knowledge, infrastructure, all-efficient and others  but most of all, the kindest of people; never fighting, never provoking, never misunderstanding, always sharing, always together, always passing on knowledge, always honest and all the other good deeds they do.\n\nIt only seems impossible to find these people unless we become them.\nThe least we can do is to learn from our own mistakes and rise every time we fall, not blaming others.\n\nAh, yes. There is also another definition of the master race. During the Nazi time, Hitler ordered that all German people were to be measured their physiques. Those with smaller skulls, noses, mouthes, or ears were to be eliminated as Hitler only believed that those whose physiques were big are the only "masters". That is their general statement which is lame.
73573
budha. and jesus. at the same time. THAT would be fun. the funny thing is, i think they'd get along...\noh, well. \n\noh!! or hitler and bush\n\nfng facists!
115261
probably Hitler of Germany.....not a good person but still was a very powerful leader .....at the present time though its probably George Bush same as Hitler not a very good person but still very powrful.\nalso napolean was quite a strong leader.
163119
I am assuming that you are referring to Hans Frank, who was a top advisor to Hitler in the National Socialist Party.\n\nFrank was a Reichsminister without portfolio and later Governor-General of occupied Poland.  He was tried and sentenced to death in Nurnberg.  He was held responsible for the execution of the "final solution", genocide of Jews.  He was hanged in 1946.  I don't want to dignify the life of this truly abominable creature with further comment.
257317
Adolf Hitler\nHermann Goring\nJoseph Goebbels\nHeinrich Himmler