Purpose of life and attitude toward death

Józef Makselon

Purpose of life and attitude toward

death

Collectanea Theologica 57/Fasciculus specialis, 145-155

1987

C o lle c ta n e a T h e o lo g ic a 57 (1987) fasc. sp e c ia lis

PURPOSE O F LIFE AND ATTITUDE TO W A RD DEATH The p ro b lem of p u rp o se in life is am ong th e c e n tral q uestio ns of co n te m p o ra ry p sy ch o lo g y , e sp e c ia lly h u m an istic -e x iste n tia l p s y ­ chology. This p sy c h o lo g y an aly zes th e p e rc e iv e d p u rp o se in life, w hich is a fu n d am en tal h u m an need. T he g ratificatio n of this p s y ­ chological n e e d is a p rim a ry so u rce for m o tiv atio n h um an behav ior. The im p o rtan ce of p u rp o se in life, stre sse d by V. E. F ra n k l to ­ day, is b a sed on a n u n d e rsta n d in g of w h at th e h ig h est v a lu e in life is. T he a n sw e r to th is q u e stio n is as in te g ral a p a rt of a p e rso n 's essen ce as th in k in g a b ility (cf. Grom m , 1975:77). O ne w ho h a s tr a n s ­ cend ed him self th ro u g h th e a c ce p tan c e of h u m an v a lu e s n eed n o t stop b efo re co n sid erin g th e p roblem of p u rp o se in life. W h en p u r­ pose is lack in g th e n w h at F ra n k l calls th e „noo gene n e u ro sis” arises, w hose c e n tral sym ptom is an e x is te n tia l vacuum .

A p e rso n h a v in g a stro n g sen se of p u rp o se in life u n d e rsta n d s in d e p th his life's g oals and is open to all th a t th e fu tu re brings. T he h igh se n se of p u rp o se in life g iv es th e p e rso n a feelin g of certitu d e, se cu rity in life, an d a p o ssib ility of self-actualization. As a result, life becom es a ttrac tiv e .

P erso n s w ho lack a sen se of p u rp o se in life e x h ib it th e oppo site ty p e of b e h a v io r (cf. F ran k l, 1967).

T h e n e e d of a sen se of p u rp o se in life com es la te r in an in d iv i­ d u al's life th a n biolo gical needs, b u t is at lea st as strong. T he p ro ­ blem of p u rp o se in life a p p e ars in e x tre m e an d som etim es d ram atic situation s, w h en a p e rso n w ould choose to s u rv iv e for th a t purpose, but w ould n o t sa v e his life if its sen se of m ean ing is m issing (Frankl, 1970).

A lso in life's fu n d am en tal m om ents a p p e ars a p ro blem of death, w hich is b o u n d a ry h um an situ atio n . D eath is n o t a s e p a ra te fragm ent of life b u t an e x is te n tia l d im en sio n of h u m an being. A cco rd in g to F rankl, an u n c o n d itio n a l co n fe rra l of m eanin g upo n life m ust co n ­ tain th e m om ent of d eath, b ecau se o nly in th e face of d e a th is life m eaningful (cf. B uscaglia, 1978: 93— 97). D eath e n d s th e p ro ce ss of becom ing. In d eath , a p e rso n „is", an d „is" in a w a y th a t is a n a lo ­ gical to th e w a y h e „w as" in life (cf. Bulka, 1974).

T he d e a th as a n a tu ra l p h en o m en o n could p lay a p o sitiv e ro le in p ro v o k in g a p e rso n to m ake an e x is te n tia l d ecision. To p la y th is role, d e a th m ust be in te g ra te d into th e p e rso n 's p sych e, an d e s p e ­ cially into his u n d e rsta n d in g an d e v a lu a tio n of life, an d also his 10 — C o ll e c t a n e a T h e o lo g ic a 87

self-p ercep tio n in in te rp e rso n a l re la tio n s (cf. Loder, 1982: 147; Ro­ gers, 1980: 88).

P hilo so p h ers an d psych o lo g ists say th a t th e p roblem of d e a th and tra n sitio n is c o n n ected w ith th e p u rp o se in life. Fox exam ple, acco rd in g to A. Schaff (1961), d e a th is a m ajo r stim ulus to c o n sid e ra ­ tion of life. A. M aslow (1967) th in k s th a t one can d e scrib e o ne's sen se of p u rp o se in life on th e basis of his rela tio n sh ip to death. T hese th e o re tic a l sta te m e n ts ab o u t th e conn ections b e tw e en a ttitu ­ des to w a rd d e a th an d lev e l of sen se of p u rp o se in life h a v e b een p a rtia lly confirm ed in som e th an a to lo g ic al re s e a rc h (e.g. Bolt, 1978; Durlak, 1972; L andau and M aoz, 1978).

T he p re se n t a rtic le looks at th e c o rre la tio n b e tw e en lev el of sense of p u rp o se in life an d v a rio u s dim ensions and in stan ces of a ttitu d e s to w a rd d eath .

Method

T he aim of th is a rticle is to a n sw e r th e question: do re la tio n ­ ships ex ist b e tw e en lev e l of sen se of p u rp o se in life and v ario u s d i­ m ensions of a ttitu d e s to w a rd death? T he p re se n t re s e a rc h co n tain s only som e frag m en ts of a d iscu ssion of th e problem , b e c au se th e resp o n d e n ts w e re y o u n g (age 21—35; M = 25.8). T hey com pleted tw o p sy ch o m etric in stru m en ts: „P urpose in Life T est" (PLT) and „In­ v e n to ry of A ttitu d e s to w a rd D eath" (IAD). U sing PLT, th e le v e l of sense of p u rp o se in life w as d e te rm in e d an d p sy ch o m etric g roups w ere d isting u ish ed . By m eans of IAD, th e a ttitu d e s to w a rd d e a th of th e se g ro u ps w e re described.

L. G. C ro u m b au g h an d L. T. M ah olick's „P urpose in Life T est" (1969) m ea su res th e p h en o m en on of e x iste n tia l fru stratio n . T he p re se n t stu d y u sed only o n e p a rt of th is te s t m ea su rin g th e in te n sity of sense of life's p u rpo se.

A m ong th e 250 resp o n d e n ts tw o e x tre m e gro u p s of 50 p e rso n s e a ch w e re identifed. T he to ta l a v e ra g e re su lts for e a c h of th ese g roups on th e PLT w ere: for th e g roup w ith th e hig h sen se of p u r ­ pose in life (HP) M = 122.6 (wom en: M =„. 123.2, m an: M = 122.3), and for th e group w ith th e lo w sen se of p u rp o se in life (LP) M = , 75.8 (wom en: M = 72.9, m an: M = 80.2). T h ese tw o g ro u p s differ sig n i­ fican tly w ith re g a rd to th e lev e l of sen se of p u rp o se in life, w h ich w as in d ep e n d e n t v aria b le , w h ile a ttitu d e s to w a rd d e a th w e re th e d e p e n d en t v ariable.

T he „In v e n to ry of A ttitu d es to w a rd D eath" w as c o n stru c te d b y th e a u th o r of th is study. It consists of th re e p a rts: th e scale, th e q u e stio n n a ire, and se n te n c e com pletion. W h e n e sta b lish in g th e set of sta te m e n ts w h ic h c o n stitu te th e scale th e W ro c law tax o n o m y w as m ade u se of, th is tax o n o m y b ein g a v a ria n t of a facto r a n a ly sis (Szulga, 1971). As a resu lt, e ig h t dim en sio n s of th e a ttitu d e to w a rd

d e a th w e re ob tain ed : 1) in e v ita b ility (In) = . a w a ren e ss of n ec essity of d e a th , 2) c e n tra lity (Ce) = p sy ch ic n e a rn e ss of th e p ro blem of death, 3) m y ste rio u sn e ss (My) = ; d e a th as a to rm e n tin g q u estion co n n ected w ith u n c e rta in ty , 4) v a lu e (Va) = d e a th as h a v in g a ca­ th artic c h a ra c te r, 5) a n x ie ty (An) (=. d e a th as a p h en o m en o n cau sing fear, 6) tra g e d y (Tr) = d e a th as an im p ressiv e a n d u n h a p p y event, 7) d e stru c tiv e n e ss (De) = . d e a th as th e c a n c e lla tio n of d e v elo p m en t and activ ity , and 8) a b su rd ity (Ab) == d e a th as a re le a s e of feeling of h o p elessn ess an d sen selessness.

R eliab ility of th e sub scales (dim ensions) w as m ea su red b y th e re te s t m eth o d a fte r a 3-w eek lag·, r tt = 0.66 to 0.84. T he q u e stio n n a ire and se n te n c e com pletion su p p lied in fo rm atio n on a ttitu d e s to w a rd d e a th in th re e in sta n c e s (cases), in th e d e a th of a stra n g e r, th a t of som eone close, and in o n e's ow n d eath . D escribed b e lo w a re re su lts o b tain ed from th e scale a n d q u e stio n n a ire of th e IAD.

Results

(a) d i m e n s i o n s o f a t t i t u d e t o w a r d d e a t h

B etw een p e rso n s w ith h ig h and low lev e l of sense of p u rp o se in life exist s ta tistic a lly sign ificant d ifferen ces in 4 dim en sio ns: in e v i­ tab ility (p<C.01), c e n tra lity (p <C.05), m y ste rio u sn e ss (p <C .05), and a n x ie ty (p < .05). T h ere a re n o t q u a lita tiv e b u t q u a n tita tiv e d iffe­ rences, an d e x p re s s d iv e rse in te n sity in p e rc e p tio n of som e d im en ­ sions of d e a th . T he p e rso n s w ith th e h igh sen se of p u rp o se in life p e rc e iv e th e in e v ita b ility of d e a th a n d its m y ste rio u sn e ss a little less freq u en tly . T h e y a re less afraid of d eath, or ra th e r, to be m ore p recise, th e y do n o t k n o w w h e th e r th e y a re afraid of d eath . T he tw o groups e x h ib it u n a n im ity re g a rd in g th e d e stru c tiv e n e ss of d eath, and a v e ry g re a t sim ilarity in p e rc e p tio n of d e a th 's v a lu e as w ell as its ab su rd ity . T he h ig h est in d ex o b tain ed w as for m y s te ­ rio u sn ess dim ension. It is lik e ly th a t th e p e rso n s w ith th e low sense of p u rp o se in life em p hasize th e m y ste ry a n d p ro b le m atic ity of d e a th b e c au se for th e se p eo p le life itself is an enigm a.

For a d e e p e r a n a ly sis of a ttitu d e s to w a rd d e a th in e a c h of th e p sy ch o m etric g ro u p s it seem s usefu l to o b se rv e th e in te rc o rre la tio n s am ong d im en sio n s of d eath .

C o m p ariso n of th e in te rn a l s tru c tu re s of a ttitu d e s to w a rd d e a th b rings a n e w o b serv atio n . A nd, for e x a m p le so-called c e n tra lity of p ro b lem of d e a th , or its spot in a p e rso n 's c o g n itiv e field is diffe­ r e n tly c o n stitu te d in th e g roup w ith th e lo w se n se of p u rp o se in life th a n in th e o th er one. T he low g ro u p e x p e rie n c e s th e p ro b lem of d e a th in co n n e ctio n w ith its tra g e d y , v a lu e , in ev ita b ility , and a n x ie ­ ty. Instead , for th e p e rso n s w ith th e hig h sen se of p u rp o se in life th e c e n tra lity of p ro b lem of d e a th h a s p o sitiv e c o rre la tio n s o n ly

T able 1

In te rc o rre la tio n s am ong d im en sio n s of a ttitu d e s to w a rd d e a th in tw o g roups

D im ensions of d e a th In Ce M y V a A n Tr De A b

H i g h s e n s e o f p u r p o s e

In e v ita b ility (In) .53*** .05 .39** .43** .03 .03 — .11

C e n tra lity (Ce) .48*“ — .18 .36* .14 —.26 .007 — .17

M y ste rio u sn e ss (My) .25 .04 — .09 .45*** .54*** .53*** .49***

V a lu e (Va) .36* .45** .13 .15 —.32* —.12 —.30*

A n x ie ty (An) .39** .35* .43** — .05 .46*** .48*** .41**

T ra g e d y (Tr) .52*** .47*** .39** .005 .58*** .68*** .63***

D e stru c tiv e n e ss (De) .32* .05 .40** — .007 .40** .44*** .67***

A b su rd ity (Ab) .20 .03 .24 .33* .40** .44** .47*** L o w s e n s e o f p u r p o s e •p < .05 **p < .01 '**p < .001 JO ZEF m a k s e l o n

w ith th e v a lu e an d in e v ita b ility dim ensions. T h ere a re also in ­ te re s tin g differen ces in v a lu e d im ension. T he v a lu e of d e a th in th e g roup w ith th e low p u rp o se in life is p e rc e iv e d as an ab su rd and n e c e ssa ry fact (event) w h ile in p e rso n s w ith th e hig h p u rp o se in life d e a th 's e v a lu a tio n is c o n n ected w ith an ac ce p tatio n of its n e ­ cessity , a n x iety , and th e n e g a tio n of th e tra g e d y a n d th e a b su rd ity of death.

T h e re a re no d ifferen ces in th e d im en sio n s of a ttitu d e to w a rd d e a th b e tw e en w om en and m en, e x c e p t in th e g ro up w ith th e low sense of p u rp o se in life, w h e re w om en see a g re a te r v a lu e of d e a th th an m en (p < .05).

A n aly sis of th e s e d a ta lead s us to th e n e x t question, w h ich is in te re stin g from th e m eth o d o lo g ical p o in t of view : w e can a sk — does n ot th e p re fe rre d sy stem of v a lu e s influ ence th e v a rio u s in ­ te rc o rre la tio n s of d im ensions of a ttitu d e s to w a rd d e a th in th e tw o groups? If th is w e re so, all re su lts o b tain ed up to n o w w o uld h a v e to be w rong. W e re la te d th e tw o lev e ls of p u rp o se in life to scores on th e G. W . A llport, P. E. V ern o n , an d G. L indzey's ,,S tud y of V a lu e s”. W e found no s ta tistic a lly sign ifican t differences (at .05 by chi-square) b e tw e e n th e tw o groups.

C oncluding th e p sy c h o m etric-p sy ch o lo g ical a n a ly sis of th e r e ­ lationship b e tw e en le v e l of sen se of p u rp o se in life and th e stru c tu ­ re of a ttitu d e s to w a rd d eath , it m ust b e n o ted in g en eral, th a t th e re a re no rad ical, i.e., q u a lita tiv e , d ifferen ces in d im ensions of a ttitu ­ des to w a rd d e a th b e tw e e n p e rso n s w ith th e hig h and low se n se of p u rp o se in life. In ste a d th e re e x ist d iffe re n c es in th e in te n s ity of four dim ensions:, in ev ita b ility , c e n trality , m y sterio u sn ess, and a n ­ xiety. T h ere a re also v a rio u s in te rc o rre la tio n s am ong d im en sio n s of a ttitu d e to w a rd d e a th in tw o groups.

C. J a s p e rs ' (1971) a n a ly sis of h u m an ex iste n ce , an in tu itio n , an d d a ily e x p e rie n c e form th e basis for d istin g u ish in g th re e d ifferen t in stan ces of a ttitu d e s to w a rd d eath . W e can p a y a tte n tio n to d e a th as a g e n e ra l p h en o m en o n h a p p e n in g a c cid e n ta lly (TV im ages of death, o b itu a ry notices). This k in d of d e a th is c h a ra c te riz e d b y its an o n y m ity due to lack of p e rso n a l a c q u ain ta n c e w ith th e d e ceased . The n e x t tw o so rts of d eath are to ta lly d ev o id of th is ano ny m ity , becau se th e y a re co n n ected w ith close p e rso n or oneself. T hus th re e in sta n c es of a ttitu d e to w a rd d e a th w ere d isting uished : 1) d e a th of stra n g e r (unknow n person), 2) d e a th of som eone close, 3) p o ssib i­ lity of o n e's ow n d eath.

Below w e w ill p re se n t ty p e s of feelin g s con n ected w ith d e a th , fre q u e n c y of th in k in g ab o u t d e a th , and, at th e end, th e so rts of q uestion s a risin g d u rin g reflec tio n on d e a th an d th e ir in flu en ce on life-style.

(ib) e m o t i o n a l c o n t e x t o f t h i n k i n g a b o u t d e a t h T ab le 2 show s th e p e rc e n ta g e d istrib u tio n s of feeling s co n n ected w ith th re e in sta n c es of h u m an d eath .

T a b le 2

P e r c e n ta g e d istrib u tio n of fe e lin g s c o n n e c te d w ith th e d ea th of a stran ger, so m e o n e c lo s e , a n d o n e se lf

in t h e grou p s w ith th e lo w (LP) and h ig h (HP) se n s e of p u rp o se in life

R e fle c tio n on d ea th g e n e r a te s a b o v e a ll D e a th of a stra n g er so m e o n e c lo s e o n e s e lf LP HP LP HP LP HP

d ista s te for life f e e lin g of 8 6 2 2 8 — tr a n sitio n u n c e r ta in ty of th e 48 46 2 4 10 10 fu tu re 4 10 — — 10 2 d esp a ir 2 7 26 16 — — tr a n q u ility 4 8 6 — 10 8 p ain 4 4 30 24 — — b e r ea v e m en t 10 4 2 2 20 20 h o p e 4 8 — 2 8 12 sa d n e ss 10 12 30 50 6 28 a n x ie ty 6 — 2 — 28 20

It can be seen from ta b le 2 th at, gen erally , in th in k in g ab o u t d e a th of a stra n g e r, a feelin g of tra n s itio n d o m in a te s (M == 47%). N o d ifferen ces e x ist b e tw e en p e rso n s w ith th e hig h a n d low se n se of p u rp o se in life. T he situ a tio n is sim ilar for th in k in g ab o u t d e a th of som eone close, w h e re in b o th g ro u p s th e feelin g of sa d n ess is stro n g ly m ark ed (M = 40%). It is strik in g th a t th e a n x ie ty does n ot occur in p e rso n s w ith th e h ig h sen se of p u rp o se re g a rd le s s of w h e th e r th e y th in k b o th ab o u t d e a th as an u n iv e rsa l p h en o m en on or e x p e rie n c e th e d e a th of a relativ e. O n th e o th er h a n d in th in k in g ab o u t th e ir ow n d eath, th e ir a n x ie ty is a r a r e r p h en o m en o n th a n in p e rso n s w ith th e low se n se of p u rp o se in life.

O th e r feelin g s c le a rly m ark ed in th in k in g abou t d e a th of so ­ m eone close a re p a in (,M = 27% ) and d e sp air (M = 21%), b ut a t th e sam e tim e th e s e a re m o re p ro m in en t in p e rso n s w ith th e low sen se of p urpose. T h ink in g ab o u t d e a th is n o t acco m p anied b y th e feelin g of u n c e rta in ty ab o u t th e fu tu re. It is in som e m ea su re intelligible, b ecause — as is w ell-k n ow n — a p e rso n 's d em ise in sp ires p a rtic u la r

reflectio n on how n o bo d y is an islan d u n to him self b u t liv es in m ul­ tiple in te rp e rso n a l relatio n s. A ty p ic a l tra it of th is h u m an rela tio n s is th e ex iste n ce of p a rtn e rs. If th e d e a th of an in te ra c tio n p a rtn e r is in v o lv ed th e sh ak in g of fu tu re p e rsp e c tiv e could b e ex p ected ; for d e a th is an e n d to som e w o rld of h u m an e x iste n c e on b o th sides. P ro b ab ly th e feelin g of fu tu re u n c e rta in ty k e e p s in th e b a c k g ro u n d in com p ariso n w ith th e s e ex p erien ce, w hich m ore d ire c tly e n g ag e th e y o u n g p e rso n 's em o tio n al a c tiv ity in this case, such as: sadness, pain, d esp air. T he hope, an x iety , b e re a v e m e n t, tra n q u ility , feeling of tra n sitio n , an d d ista ste for life a p p e ar w eakly, alm o st v estig ially .

T hin k in g ab o u t o n e's ow n d e a th follow s a n o th e r courses. R es­ p o n d en ts a re n o t in d ifferent w ith re g a rd to b ereav em en t, w hich occupies seco n d place. T he d o m in an t fee lin g in reflec tio n about o n e ’s ow n d e a th is an x iety . T he lack of feelings of p a in an d desp air, as w ell as c le a rly m ark ed sad n ess (especially in th e g ro u p w ith th e high sen se of p u rp o se) an d th e tra n s itio n feelin g a re c h a ra c te ris ­ tic in th is case. (c) f r e q u e n c y o f t h i n k i n g a b o u t d e a t h T a b le 3 Low (LP) a n d h ig h (HP) p u rp o se in life and fr e q u e n c y of th in k in g ab ou t d eath (%) I th in k ab ou t d eath D e a th of a stran ger so m e o n e c lo s e o n e s e lf LP HP LP HP LP HP v e r y o ften 6.0 6.7 10.0 13.3 8.0 10.0 o ften 32.0 46.7 36.0 40.0 36.0 30.0 se ld o m 60.0 43.3 52.0 46.7 52.0 60.0 n e v e r 2.0 3.3 2.0 ■—· 4.0 —■

T hin k in g ab o u t d e a th of som eone close is d ifferen t from th in k ­ ing abo u t d e a th of a stra n g e r or o n e 's own. A m ong p e rso n s w ith the low sen se of p u rp o se in life th e re a re th o se w ho n e v e r th in k at all ab o u t death. This does n o t m ean th a t th e p ro blem of d e a th is to ta lly fo reig n to th e young, b ec au se alm ost half th e resp o n d e n ts v e ry often or often th in k abou t d e a th of a stra n g e r (M = 45.7%), som eone close (M = 49.7%), and th em se lv e s (M = 42%).

T he em p irical d a ta p re se n te d h e re su g gest th a t fre q u e n c y of th in k in g ab o u t d e a th h a s no e s se n tia l co n n ectio n w ith le v e l of se n se of p u rp o se in life, or, in o th er w ords, th e co n fe rra l of m ean ing on o n e's ow n life is n o t a re s u lt of fre q u e n t th in k in g a b o u t d e a th b u t of th e q u a lity of life.

(d) t h i n k i n g a b o u t d e a t h a n d t y p e o f q u e s t i o n a s k e d

It seem s th a t th in k in g ab o u t d e a th p ro v o k es tw o kinds of q u e s ­ tions: th e o re tic a l an d prag m atic. In th e first case th e q u estio n is ab o u t th e origin an d goal of life, an d in second, w h at should be done not to w aste o n e's life?

T ab le 4

T h in k in g about d ea th and ty p e of q u estio n s

a sk ed b y th e g roup s w ith th e lo w (LP) and h ig h (HP) p u rp o se in lif e (%)

T h in k in g abou t D eath of d ea th I a sk a b o v e

all a stran ger so m e o n e c lo s e 1 o n e s e lf

LP HP LP HP LP HP 1) w h a t is th e o r ig in and g o a l of life 48.0 40.0 40.0 36.7 48.0 43.4 2) h o w n ot to w a s te m y o w n life 40.0 46.7 38.0 36.7 28.0 26.6 3) it has no in ­ f lu e n c e o n m y life 12.0 13.3 22.0 26.6 24.0 30.0

T he m ost g e n e ra l te n d e n c y is to em p h asize th e q u estio n abou t th e orig in and goal of life. It is c le a re st in th in k in g ab o u t o n e's ow n d e a th (M =,.45.7%). T he second a lte rn a tiv e (how to n ot w a ste o n e ’s ow n life) is m ore m ark ed d u rin g th in k in g abo ut d e a th of a stra n g e r (M = 43.4%) and som eone close, an d less so in th in k in g ab o u t one's ow n d e a th (M = 26.3%). E n co u n terin g th e p ro b le m of o n e's ow n d e a th is m et w ith re la tiv e ly g re a t in d ifferen ce in th e g ro up w ith th e high sen se of p u rp o se in life.

O ne m ight try to ex p la in th is stress on th e p ro blem of life's origin an d g o als in th in k in g ab o u t o n e's ow n d e a th b y th e p h ilo so ­ phical in te re sts of y o u n g people, w hose p h ilo so p h y of life is no t y e t stabilized. S tabilization e n ta ils a specific rec k o n in g of th e p a st to decide w hat is to be re p a ire d and w h at w as w asted; in short, the period of ad u lt an d m id-life a re ab ove all tim es to fo rm u late a p h ilo ­ so ph y of future, b u t n o t to e v a lu a te th e p a st (cf. K astenbaum , 1977: 145— 150).

(e) t h i n k i n g a b o u t d e a t h a n d a t t i t u d e t o w a r d l i f e

T able 5 co n tains d ata on th e selectio n of v a rio u s a lte rn a tiv e s w h en co n fro n ted w ith th in k in g ab o u t death.

T ab le 5

■Reflection abou t d eath and a ttitu d e s to w a rd life in th e g rou p s w ith lo w (LP) and h ig h (HP) p u rp o se in life (%)

W h e n I c o m e face to fa c e w ith th e D e a th of fact o f d ea th I d e c id e a b o v e all a stra n g er s o m e o n e c lo s e o n e s e lf LP HP LP HP LP HP 1) to g e t a s m uch out o f life as I can 8.0 10.0 10.0 16.7 22.0 16.7 2) c h a n g e m y w a y s 42.0 40.0 36.0 40.0 50.0 50.0 3) I m a k e no . d e c is io n 50.0 50.0 54.0 43.3 28.0 33.3

R eflection ab o u t d e a th of a stra n g e r h as th e le a st in flu en ce and th en half th e re sp o n d e n ts do n o t m ake e x iste n tia l decision s, w h ile th e re st d e sire to refo rm (M = 41%). T he situ a tio n is sim ilar w ith th in k in g ab o u t th e d e a th of som eone close. H o w ev er w h en th in k in g ab o u t o n e's ow n d e a th th e situ atio n ch an g es rad ically ; th en th e d e sire to c o rre c t o neself d o m in a te s (M = 50%). The q u estio n of how to get th e m ost out of life also a p p e ars m ore often in th is instance. S ta tistica lly sign ificant differen ces do n o t e x ist b e tw e en perso n s w ith th e h igh an d low sen se of p u rp o se in life.

O n th e g ro u n d of th e foregoing d a ta one can com e to th e co n ­ clusion th a t it is difficult for y o u n g p eo ple to be to ta lly in d ifferen t to o n e's ow n death.. T h ere is p ro b a b ly a m echanism of rep re ssio n of th e in e v ita b ility of d eath at w o rk h ere, w ith th e re su lt th a t th e y se ek a w ay to en jo y or am end life. T his te n d e n c y is c h a ra c te ristic for both groups.

C onclusion

The sen se of p h rp o se in life does n o t rad ic ally m odify a ttitu d e s to w a rd d eath , b ut only influences som e of th e ir d im ensions (inevi­ tab ility , c e n tra lity , m y sterio u sn ess, anxiety). P robab ly th e basic facto r co nd ition in g p e rc e p tio n of d e a th in resp o n d e n ts of th is stu d y

is not th e lev e l of p u rp o se in life b u t ra th e r p sy ch o lo g ical distan ce from o n e's ow n death.

T h ink in g abo u t d e a th is in fre q u en t in th e groups studied. A co n ­ sid e ra b le nu m b er of resp o n d e n ts, w h en co n fro n ted w ith th e th o u g h t of d eath , m ak e little ch an g e in th e ir ow n life-style. E n co unterin g th e fact of d eath en g ag es em otional p ro cesses m ore th a n in te lle c tu a l ones such as m echanism s of au to co rrectio n . T h e sm aller th e d ista n c e to th e fact or pro b lem of d eath , th e g re a te r th e in c re a se in feeling s co n n ected w ith th e d eath. A n d so, if one th in k s ab o u t th e d e a th of a stra n g e r th e te n d e n c y to in te lle c tu a liz e an d th e ,,ph iloso phical" feeling of tra n s itio n appear. This te n d e n c y d isa p p e a rs w h en a d e a th is of closet one p o ssib le for a y o u n g perso n , th a t is, e x p e rien c e of a close re la tiv e 's d eath . A t such tim es u n re a so n e d rea c tio n s (sad­ ness, pain, an d despair) p red o m in ate. W h e n th e re sp o n d e n ts th in k about o n e ’s ow n d e a th th e n b o th a n x ie ty an d b e re a v e m e n t a re p ro ­ m inent.

In fu tu re re s e a rc h on th e rela tio n sh ip b e tw e en a ttitu d e s to w a rd d eath and sen se of p u rp o se in life, c o n sid e ratio n o ug ht to be giv en to an u n d e rsta n d in g of p u rp o se in life, esp ec ially in re fe re n c e to v alues as th e se re la te to sense of p u rp o se in life. This w ill be p o ssi­ ble after p re p a ra tio n of a n e w scale for m easu rin g th e v a rio u s com ­ po nents of life p urpose. Of course, th e co n n ectio n b e tw e e n s u b je c ti­ ve e x p e cta tio n and p e rc e p tio n of tim e on th e one hand, and w ith both th e p u rp o se in life and a ttitu d e s to w a rd d eath, on th e other, can help in th e fo rm u latio n of h e u ristic a lly in te re stin g h y p o th eses.

B ib lio grap h y

B o l t M., P u r p o s e in Hie a n d d e a t h c o n c e r n , „Journal of G en etic P sy c h o lo g y " , 1978, 132, 159— 160.

B u l k a R. P., D e a t h in lite — t a lm u d i c an d l o g o t h e r a p e u t i c a t tir m a tio n s , „H um a­ nitas" , 1974, 10, 33— 41.

В u s с a g 1 i a L. F., P e r s o n h o o d . T h e art o t a b e in g f u l l y hu m an , N e w York: Bal- la n tin e B ook s, 1982.

C r u m b a u g h L. G., M a h o l i c k L. T., M a n u a l o t in s t r u c ti o n s to r th e P u r ­

p o s e in Lite T es t, M u nster, Ind.: P sy c h o m e tr ic A ffilia te s, 1969.

D u r 1 a к J., R e la t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n i n d i v i d u a l a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d l it e a n d d e a th , „Jou rn al of C o u n s u ltin g and C lin ica l P sy c h o lo g y " , 1972, 38, 462— 468. F r a n k l V. E., T h e d o c t o r an d th e sou l, N e w York: B antam B ooks, 1967. F r a n k l V. E., T h e w i l l to m e a n in g , N e w York: N e w A m eric a n Library, 1970. G r o m m B., A u l d e r S u c h e n a c h d e m Sin n d e s L eb e n s , Freiburg: H erder, 1975. J a s p e r s C., P h i l o s o p h y o t e x i s t e n c e , P h ila d elp h ia : U n iv e r s ity of P e n n s y lv a n ia

P ress, 1971.

К a s t e n b a u m R. J., D e a th , s o c i e t y a n d h u m a n e x p e r i e n c e , Sant Louis: C. V. M o sb y Co., 1977.

L a n d a u E., M a o z B., C r e a t i v i t y a n d s e l i- a c t u a l is a ti o n in t h e a g i n g p e r s o n a ­

l i t y , „ A m erica n Jou rn al of P sy ch o th er a p y " , 1978, 32, 117— 127.

L o d e r J. E., T h e t r a n s i o r m in g m o m e n t , S an F ran cisco: H arp er an d R ow Pu­ b lish er s, 1982.

M a s l o w A ., A t h e o r y o l m e t a m o t i v a t i o n : t h e b i o lo g i c a l r o o t i n g o i th e v a l u e

lil e, „Journ al of H u m a n istic P s y c h o lo g y ”, 1967, 7, 93— 127.

R o g e r s C. R., A w a y o i b e in g , B oston: H o u g h to n M ifflin Co., 1980.

S c h a f f A ., M a r k s i z m a e g z y s t e n c j a l i z m (M arxism a n d e x is te n tia lism ), W a rsza ­ w a: P W N , 1961.

S z u 1 g a T., N u m e r i c a l m e t h o d s in t a x o n o m y o i K l e b s ie l a , „ A rch iv u m Im m uno- lo g ia e et T h era p ia e E xp erim en talis" , 1971, 19, 67— 122.