What makes a morally good life? This is the mother of all questions. Previous ethical issues such as what is right and what makes right acts right seem like an infant’s teething toy compared to this epitome of all moral dilemmas: How should I live my life? The study of ethics and morality mean nothing, if we don’t implement these values into daily life. What is the ultimate goal of learning right and wrong, if not to utilize such important insights? But like all of life’s great questions, it’s hard to determine the best answer. If right versus wrong seemed like a moral quandary, there are infinitely more ideas from centuries of philosophers telling humanity what makes a morally good life. Through examining the reigning theories of the “good life,” perhaps we can find a stable answer to this ultimate question and build a firmer foundation for an ethical existence. The article “No Laughing Matter” by Pilita Clark presents some useful examples that can help to analyze moral theories.
Often considered the wisest of antiquity philosophers, Plato and Aristotle shared similar ideas on how to live a good life. “Virtue ethics,” or the theory that one should get himself in order so as to be on the right path, is the overarching theme both philosophers preach. Plato believed that justice (the essence of morality) is simply to be at peace with oneself. By unifying the parts within that drive our choices– reason, passion, and appetite – we can maintain integrity or wholeness of being. Reason must be governed by wisdom, passion dictated by courage, and appetite controlled by moderation. A morally good life is one in which, each facet does its job and only its own job with wisdom in command.
Aristotle held close views to Plato, also believing that reason is a key factor to an ethical life. However, Aristotle’s concept is somewhat more complicated than his predecessor’s. He thought that for something to be good, it must excel at its purpose. As Dr. Myers’ stated, basically a good X is an X that excels at X-ness. So how do we excel at being good humans? Aristotle factored out the characteristics that plants and animals possess, until he was left with just one solely human quality…rationality. Just as Plato saw reason as king over appetites and motivation, Aristotle saw rationality as superior to the plant-like wants of nutrition and reproduction (appetites) as well as the animalistic desires of movement and sensation (motivation). Because we are rational animals, we must use rationality to lead a good life.
The next step in Aristotle’s logic is that the way to excel at rationality is to be virtuous. According to him, we are both born with and develop two kinds of virtues, intellectual and moral. Intellectual virtues are theoretical in nature and can be learned by practice or from teaching. Practical, moral virtues, in contrast, must be experienced. By habitually practicing virtues, one can become a good person. That may seem daunting, because how do we know what is the virtuous act? Aristotle notes in the Golden Mean Theory that it is usually the mean between polar vices that is right. For example, truthfulness is a virtue, but too little truthfulness would be false modesty and too much is boasting. But no, Aristotle does not suggest that a medium amount of adultery is ethical. Certain vices are always vices. The bottom line is, we must delight in doing the virtuous thing, and it is what we do that determines our character.
Many of Aristotle’s ideas are mirrored in the article “No Laughing Matter.” In the book Stumbling on Happiness, Daniel Gilbert agrees with the good of rationality stating, “Humans will always be distinguished by their brains’ ability to imagine.” However, author Nicolas White of A Brief History of Happiness would wholly disagree with Plato and Aristotle’s view of a moral living. These philosophers, White counters, had a happy life too “rigidly planned.” Taking the perception of theorist Virginia Held (who will be mentioned later), White understands that, “Real life, of course, can be far more complex.” While I personally think Plato and Aristotle had some great points with virtue ethics, they aren’t so relevant in today’s society. Wisdom and rationality are very important components of life, but I’m sure the ancient philosophers may have revised their theories a bit, had they seen the last couple thousand years. Rationality, alone, is not the final answer.
Virginia Held, on the other hand, would agree with White that life is too complex for such a rigid theory. A contemporary thinker, Held helped bring “feminist ethics” to the forefront of philosophy. Feminist ethics, also known as “care ethics,” challenges centuries of the traditional patriarchal perspective of morality. Although some people believe in “equality phase,” that women should be treated equal to men, Held sees this as condescending. At first I didn’t understand how equality could be condescending, but Held further explains; Philosophy is written from the male point of view, and just because men now allow women in on their philosophies, this still assumes that the male perspective is correct way. Held offers the “difference phase,” that men and women are different, and so their values differ. She understands that there are many ways to be human and to live a moral life, not merely one path.
To me, Virginia Held makes the most sense of any of the philosophers I’ve studied. With care ethics, she fills in the gaps and holes which haunted previous theories, making them impractical. In three well defined sections, Held presents the conflicting stances. First is reason versus emotion. Aristotle and Plato obviously put reason on a pedestal, but they dismiss emotion as lowly animal instinct. Held argues that emotion is a valuable and honorable part of living a happy and ethical life. Next, feminist ethics notes that traditional theories overemphasize the public side of life, and shun the private home life. A good life, care ethics replies, is not just excelling at the job, but also having a fulfilling family and private life. Finally, patriarchal philosophies present people as rational, self interested individuals, yet they ignore that self identity is proportional to our relationships with other people. As illustrated in the article, “detachment or emotional indifference are harder to accept today.” The ethics of care takes into account multidimensional complexities of humans.
The next theorists, Epicurus and Epictetus, represent opposite sides of the same coin. Epictetus believed in invulnerable morality, morality which is not based on a matter of luck. As a Stoic, he thought man should focus his passion only on what he could control to have a good life. The only thing in one’s control is personal thoughts. Gilbert, however, might disagree, because people now have to decide “where to live, what to do, and whom to marry.” These were decisions Epictetus would have little control over, which are major decisions for a good life today, “…for the first time, happiness is in our hands.”
In contrast, Epicurus and Gilbert go hand in hand, because what Gilbert refers to is a matter of luck. Epicurus represents moral luck, the theory that much of our happiness is based on circumstances, environment, and the teachers that shape our decisions. Yet within whatever situation we find ourselves, we must use reason to tamp down appetites and pursue pleasure in a rational way. The grand finale of Epicurus’ philosophy is the thought that everything that exists is just particles randomly globing together.
Overall, I find Epicurus’ theories a jumbled mess. I can agree that much of life is due to circumstance, so moral luck isn’t too abstract to grasp, but it doesn’t link very well with the rest of his opinions. Epictetus’ ideas are also interesting, but they also lack relevance that I think a moral philosophy needs to survive. Plato and Aristotle had something with the thought of being at peace with oneself, but they left too much of life out of their rigid plan for a good life. So, what makes a morally good life? I believe Virginia Held ultimately gave the best answer. The key to a good life is balance, care for others, and recognizing the many shapes life takes.
