The nature of the human being is characterized by the struggle between freedom and destiny. In his book titled Freedom and Destiny, Rollo May discusses the dialectical relationship between the two concepts. Basically, he argues that freedom and destiny are opposing concepts that need each other for either to exist. However, their opposition is what causes the fundamental dilemma that characterizes the human being: who are we and who are we supposed to be? This paper discusses the theories of three psychologists who have addressed this question. For purposes of coherence, the first under discussion is Erich Fromm who argues that human existence is characterized by fundamental contradictions that originate from man's attempt to overcome feelings of isolation. The second is Rollo May, discussed above. And the third is Karen Horney, who argues for the moral responsibility that may cause the development of neuroses during the search for one's destiny.
In his study titled The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness, Erich Fromm maintains that most thinkers since the Greek philosophers believed it to be self-evident that there existed something called "human nature," something that constituted the essence of man (1973, p. 219). He notes that there were various views about what precisely such human nature was, but he observes that there was general agreement that such an essence existed. That is, that there was something by virtue of which man was man. Fromm also notes, however, that more recently, theorists have begun to question this view (Fromm, 1973, p. 219).
Fromm's own proposal regarding the essence of human nature is that man's nature cannot be defined in terms of a specific quality, such as love, hate, reason, for good or evil (1973, p. 226). Rather, he argues that man's essential human nature can only be discussed in terms of "fundamental contradictions that characterize human existence and have their root in the biologic...