Publication Type

Magazine Article

Version

acceptedVersion

Publication Date

12-2025

Abstract

Picture two people on their deathbeds. The first lived comfortably, surrounded by loving family and friends, enjoying diverse pleasures and achievements throughout a long life. The second dedicated herself entirely to fighting injustice, achieving remarkable social change, but at great personal cost. Who lived the better life?Your answer might depend on what you mean by ‘better’. Philosophers have long recognized that when we call a life ‘good’ we can mean different things. So we could be talking about a life’s moral goodness – how virtuous the person was – or its prudential goodness – how well the life went for the person living it. But there’s a third dimension we often overlook: how meaningful the life was. This gives us three distinct questions we can ask about any life: 1. Was it morally good? 2. Did it go well for the person living it? 3. Was it meaningful?These questions pull in different directions. A morally exemplary life might involve suffering for others’ sake, making it less prudentially good. A meaningful life might also require sacrifices that reduce personal well-being. Understanding these tensions can help us navigate our choices about how to live.

Keywords

well-being, meaning in life, well-rounded life, life balance

Discipline

Philosophy

Research Areas

Humanities

Areas of Excellence

Sustainability

Publication

Philosophy Now

Issue

171

First Page

1

Last Page

5

ISSN

0961-5970

Publisher

Philosophy Documentation Center

Comments

Philosophy Now is a commercial magazine that holds full copyright of my article.

Additional URL

https://philosophynow.org/issues/171/The_Good_Life_Paradox

Download

Included in

Philosophy Commons

Share

COinS