I learned that a hypothesis that I based much of a lifetime of work on is actually incomplete, it is wrong under some conditions. We learn as we go no. It is all history now, but the feeling of finding out a major hypothesis of our life is wrong is quite a shock.
Frankl's insight is that our primary drive in life is not pleasure, but the discovery and pursuit of what we personally find meaningful. Of course, if we find pleasure meaningful, for some, pursuit of pleasure is meaningful. Pleasure is specific, while what we personally find meaningful is general, making the US constitution equivalent to a hypothesis that we just realized as incomplete, but we still understand it.
Then there are the dueling hypothesis of god/no god. Before this can be addressed we need to decide on what is evidence. If we eliminate all holy books as hearsay, then the no god hypothesis has much more support and credibility. When we just review all the available evidence, the case is clear, there is no god. I understand how this hypothesis is impossible for some to accept, it goes against all that they have believed all there lives. The only solution for them is to die off. Oh well.
So is there a direct connection between what we find meaningful and our actions. The simple answer is no, since staying on a diet is next to impossible. Eating and desiring food is much more of a physical/primitive instinct that is even our belief system, but our beliefs are much closer than is our reasoning mind. So if I am to make not eating meaningful to myself in some way.... Who knows?