This book has been on my "want to read someday" list for a while, so I picked it up after encountering it at a thrift store. Most of the other passages that I highlighted have already been mentioned by Dragline above, but here's one of my favorite quotes of the book which provoked a "you're doing it wrong, Fish"-moment.
I consider it a dangerous misconception of mental hygiene to assume that what a man needs in the first place is equilibrium, or as it is called in biology, "homeostasis," i.e. a tensionless state. What man actually needs is not a tensionless state but rather the striving and struggling for a worthwhile goal, a freely chosen task.
This occurs near the start of Part 2 ("Logotherapy in a nutshell") and until I encountered that quote I was on the verge of putting the book down for good because VF was getting very theoretical and philosophical. Very glad I didn't, because the 2nd part of the book is actually quite profound (to me as a person who devotes far too little attention to the very big picture). This quote kind of crystallizes my own realization from personal experience that an absence of struggle and suffering in itself does not bring happiness and fulfillment.
The 1984 and later editions include an essay called "The case for a tragic optimism" which I liked even though much of the material is similar to Part 2. What follows is from the opening passage (somewhat edited for space). Not sure I fully agree with #1 but it is an interesting take.
What is meant by "tragic optimism?" In brief, it means that one is, and remains optimistic in spite of the "tragic triad:" (1) pain, (2) guilt, and (3) death. How is it possible to say yes to life in spite of all that? What matters is to make the best of any given situation. The human potential at its best always allows for: (1) turning suffering into a human achievement and accomplishment, (2) deriving from guilt the opportunity to change oneself for the better, and (3) deriving from life's transitoriness an incentive to take responsible action.
This last quote is relevant to personal finance and the FIRE movement:
In no way is suffering necessary to find meaning. I only insist that meaning is possible even in spite of suffering---provided, certainly, that the suffering is unavoidable. If it were avoidable, however, the meaningful thing to do would be to remove its cause.
The parallel I see between this book and personal finance is that many equate work with suffering, and pursue FI/RE in an effort to avoid it. To the extent that one's attitude or vocation cannot be changed such that
"work is not so bad", that is a reasonable approach. It's interesting to note that in these cases where "work is suffering and FI/RE is my way out," the prospect of early retirement assigns a purpose and meaning to the suffering that is work.
Also, since @jennypenny observes that I tend to come across as a "cranky" parent
, after reading this book I resolve to try harder to bear my responsibility in an honorable manner and perhaps even find a greater meaning in the process. I had time to read this book this past weekend, life is actually rather good!
Lastly, I almost didn't want to bring this up, but after reading this book I started having dreams of being a prisoner in a concentration camp... am I the only one?
