Meaning of Life and Happiness in Logotherapy
Olena Ronzhes, Nataliia Khmelova
Meaning of Life and Happiness in Logotherapy: A Review of Olena Ronzhes and Nataliia Khmelova’s Article “Meaning of Life and Happiness in Logotherapy: Challenges of Social and Political Implementation” and Olena Ronzhes’s “Meaningful Life Index”
Olena Ronzhes and Nataliia Khmelova’s article examines how the logotherapeutic understanding of meaning in life and happiness can be integrated into contemporary social and political approaches, particularly amid global crises and the war in Ukraine. The authors offer an interdisciplinary perspective, bringing Viktor Frankl’s Logotherapy into dialogue with an analysis of constitutional practices in different countries and contemporary indices used to measure happiness.
The study aims to systematize international approaches to the “constitutionalization of happiness”—the incorporation of happiness and well-being into public policy and constitutional provisions—and to compare them with the logotherapeutic understanding of meaning in life and happiness. Methodologically, the article draws on a comparative and analytical review of philosophical, psychological, and political and legal sources, statistical data from international surveys and reports, including the World Happiness Report, World Values Survey, and Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness index, and the extrapolation of logotherapeutic principles to the social and political level.
In the first substantive section, the authors revisit the central principles of Logotherapy: freedom of will, the will to meaning, and the uniqueness of meaning in each person’s life. Within this approach, happiness is understood as a by-product of fulfilling meaning, self-transcendence, creativity, love, and a responsible attitude toward suffering, rather than as an end in itself or a hedonistic state. Drawing on contemporary research, they emphasize the importance of a eudaimonic understanding of well-being—through meaning, values, and self-realization—as distinct from a purely hedonic approach focused on emotional satisfaction.
The article then demonstrates how the categories of “happiness” and “well-being” are gradually entering constitutional and political discourse in different countries. Examples include the United States, Japan, South Korea, Latin American countries and the philosophy of Buen Vivir, Nigeria, the United Arab Emirates, and Venezuela, alongside initiatives in the United Kingdom and New Zealand to measure well-being. Ukraine’s mental health programme “How Are You?” is also discussed as an example of public attention to psychological well-being during wartime.
An important part of the study analyses contemporary approaches to measuring happiness: the World Happiness Report, Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness index, the World Values Survey, and the European Values Study. The authors argue that, despite growing interest in these indicators, most approaches remain predominantly hedonic and do not fully encompass the noetic dimension emphasized by Logotherapy. They present arguments that economic growth has a limited influence on subjective happiness once a certain threshold has been reached, whereas meaning, values, and social connections play a decisive role.
Particular attention is given to the Ukrainian context. Analysing World Happiness Report data, the authors show that Ukraine has relatively low scores for subjective life evaluation, alongside very high levels of generosity, mutual assistance, and solidarity. They interpret this as evidence of the strength of people’s inner sources of meaning amid war and traumatization, rather than simply as a reflection of material circumstances. This finding accords with the logotherapeutic perspective: even when facing loss and threat, people can find support in meaning, responsibility, and service to others.
A valuable section addresses the risks of distorting the principles of self-transcendence in totalitarian systems. Taking Soviet ideology as an example, the authors show how the rhetoric of “serving higher purposes” can be used to suppress individuality, freedom of choice, and personal meaning. In this context, Logotherapy emphasizes that authentic service is possible only as a free, inwardly chosen commitment, rather than as an imposed duty.
The article reaches several important conclusions. First, the contemporary movement toward a “politics of happiness” requires greater depth: measuring life satisfaction alone is insufficient without considering meaning, values, and the human noetic dimension. Second, Logotherapy can provide a theoretical foundation for humanistically oriented public policy that places existential depth at its centre, alongside effectiveness and economic indicators. Third, Ukraine’s wartime experience demonstrates the particular relevance of logotherapeutic approaches to societies experiencing crisis and existential disorientation.
The study’s originality lies in its combination of Logotherapy with an analysis of constitutional practices, happiness indices, and global political trends. The article opens up possibilities for further empirical research, particularly into how an orientation toward meaning can be integrated into educational programmes, public policy, youth initiatives, civic participation projects, and post-war recovery.
An important complement to the article is the “Meaningful Life Index” (Ukrainian abbreviation: ІСЖ), an assessment method developed by Olena Ronzhes to evaluate a person’s orientation toward meaning in life and their inner direction. It is presented as a tool for making visible the noetic parameters that have remained outside most international happiness indices. The index offers a way to measure what Logotherapy regards as central to human existence: the capacity for inner freedom, a responsible attitude, love, transcendence, and spiritual maturity. The method thus serves both as a theoretical complement to the article and as an important step in the development of the Ukrainian school of Logotherapy.
Overall, the article offers a considered and in-depth perspective on the relationship between individual meaning in life and social processes. It demonstrates Logotherapy’s potential to connect psychology, philosophy, and political theory, and may be useful to researchers and practitioners seeking meaning-oriented approaches to policy, social programmes, and cultural change.