He who has why to live can bear almost anyhow

Topic: He who has a why to live can bear almost any how Two soldiers fighting in a war can walk in the opposite directions after war ends. One carries the trauma. Other does not. The reason rarely lies in the hardships that they faced. It lies in the reason.

The hope that ending of war would bring back better times. The philosopher Frederick Nietzsche puts this in a spare sentence. "He who has a why to live can bear almost any how." It is not something to be told to soften the bad news. It is rather something that brings out the potential of human endurance. Nietzsche brings out the difference which we often gets confused, the 'why' and the 'how'. 'How' is outside human's control. The lost year, the illness, the debt, the hardship are all 'how' faced by us. Sometimes identical to many of us. While, the 'Why' is something that comes from within. 'Why' varies across people, organizations, nations. This is not just a philosophic hunch. A Nazi concentration camp survivor, 'Frankle' observed this in his own observations. He found that those who survived and those who succumbed had one difference: 'Why'. They faced identical 'how', the same cold, the same hunger, the same nearness to death. But it was 'why', a hope to meet their kid, a book to read kept them alive. The 'how' is physical, tangible while the 'why' is mental fortitude, internal. The difference is crucial to give meaning to life. Imagine a daily labourer working in western Rajasthan amidst the scorching heat. The 'how' is painful, leaving nothing out of that person. It is the 'why' that might give any relief to him but surely gives direction to that heat. The daughter preparing for teaching job, the son first in the family to prepare for government job. The 'why' is what makes the individual labourer visit Rajasthan each year. Scaling this purpose to community level brings forward similar resolve.

During the COVID lockdown, the migrant Labourers who worked in cities started going back to their 'homes'. They walked and walked until they reached their villages. The 'why' of meeting their family members, uniting with one's own kin kept them moving despite blistering feet and police barricades. The cities suddenly stopped needing them but they could have stayed in the sealed cities. They chose instead to walk, 'why' was strong enough to make them able to walk hundreds of kilometers. Similar 'will power' is observed in our freedom fighters. Their 'why' of self governance, getting rid of Colonialist powers and to be governed by people of their own was non negotiable. Their 'how' was brutal. People lost their lives. Yet, they kept fighting to ensure independent India, their motherland. After the independence, India got partitioned, and many people moved across borders. The migrants who came to India got settled in Delhi and around. But they had no wealth, even no families for some. Their 'why' was firm to have a better life. They created entire markets, economy within a decade. An honest essay would test the claim limits of this claim and limits are instructive. Emile Durkheim observed that people collapse not because of 'no hardships' in their lives but the vacuum of purpose. He called this 'anomic despair'. The 'how' difficult or easy but with little or no 'why' is dangerous. It is found in societies where they have solved the 'how' of living a fulfilled life without any scarcity but lack in 'why' the meaning of life. It is the crisis we face in today's era. When everything is taken care of, plenty of resources available, the 'why' disappears in life. And 'how' rarely fails a person. It is the disappearance of 'why' from life that takes away the resilience, meaning. The digital era where everything is reduced to reviews, ratings, the joy of life has disappeared. A person working 'how' and a 'why' of score awarded by another, has narrowed the scope of life for them. This can be observed in the issues of mental health, suicide rate rising. The 'why' which gave meaning has lost to some. Lets go back to those soldiers. They both faced some hardship, some hunger yet they came out as two different people. The way to live and find meaning in life differed. These values would have been inculcated to one of them by their families, communities. The role of institutions is big enough to ensure people, organization, nations see meaning to their endeavors. To create a cause, a reason to make sure one can survive any hardship. Societies thrive and succeed not when they have solved the problems of scarcity, removed hardships but when they have inculcated values of finding 'why' in people's lives. By ensuring this India as an old civilization and too continuing one, have come this far. The hope is alive, the will to survive is intact. The 'why' is strong enough to bear any 'how'.

Emile Durkheim observed that people collapse not because of 'no hardships' in their lives but the vacuum of purpose. He called this 'anomic despair'. The 'how' difficult or easy but with little or no 'why' is dangerous. It is found in societies where they have solved the 'how' of living a fulfilled life without any scarcity but lack in 'why' the meaning of life. It is the crisis we face in today's era. When everything is taken care of, plenty of resources available, the 'why' disappears in life.