A simple definition of worthwhile living is: Living how you would like others to live.
That lifestyle which would make the world a better place is worthwhile living. We measure the betterment of the world in terms of human wellbeing. Therefore, that living which purports to increase the collective human wellbeing is worthwhile living. Since it is not always easy to run the exact measurements of what would or would not contribute to the collective wellbeing it's good to simply think of it as: how we would like others to live.
Do you get angry when someone asks bribe? Then not taking bribe is worthwhile living. You don't like it when someone breaks a traffic rule and overtakes your vehicle in an unfair way? Then observing traffic rules and being fair is worthwhile living. How will you feel if your wife cheated on you? You know that. Then not cheating on one's spouse is worthwhile living. Simple as that.
Worthwhile living is not the easiest way to live. One has to be altruistic to live a worthwhile life. Being altruistic involves forgoing one's own interests for the collective good of people.
But that, in the long run, benefits one in the form of high-quality happiness. (There's no guarantee though; and that shouldn't even be the focus of worthwhile living.) Isn't it a selfish bargain then? – one might ask. Well, yes. Everyone is selfish. But noble is he whose selfish interests are aligned with good interests of something greater than himself — like family, community, nation,... So, while selfishness, taken in a strict sense, is always present; it is not at odds with worthwhile living.
Giving collective wellbeing preference over one's own immediate wellbeing and calling it worthwhile living may sound counterintuitive to some people. Besides, on philosophical grounds also one might ask for the basis of such a conclusion, when the universe clearly doesn't have moral absolutes or externally imposed "moral oughts". It's a fair doubt, but can be explained away reasonably. We are interdependent agents in the world. It's true that humans have their own ego-identity, unlike other animals, so their primary focus tends to be on one's own self, but we do need other people to be happy and thrive. If we lived only self-indulgently we can not be happy for long because such living would naturally be followed by alienation. That's the reason sacrificial living is given so much importance in religious and traditional wisdom. Living sacrificial life without understanding this isn't advisable for happiness though, but if one understands life well, it's easy to see why being useful and valuable to the society (which is meant by enabling collective wellbeing) is called worthwhile living.
One's aim should be to live a worthwhile and virtuous life. And the reward may be a high-quality happiness, which comes as a by-product of making the best of life by doing worthwhile things — like being good and useful (to others).
That lifestyle which would make the world a better place is worthwhile living. We measure the betterment of the world in terms of human wellbeing. Therefore, that living which purports to increase the collective human wellbeing is worthwhile living. Since it is not always easy to run the exact measurements of what would or would not contribute to the collective wellbeing it's good to simply think of it as: how we would like others to live.
Do you get angry when someone asks bribe? Then not taking bribe is worthwhile living. You don't like it when someone breaks a traffic rule and overtakes your vehicle in an unfair way? Then observing traffic rules and being fair is worthwhile living. How will you feel if your wife cheated on you? You know that. Then not cheating on one's spouse is worthwhile living. Simple as that.
Worthwhile living is not the easiest way to live. One has to be altruistic to live a worthwhile life. Being altruistic involves forgoing one's own interests for the collective good of people.
But that, in the long run, benefits one in the form of high-quality happiness. (There's no guarantee though; and that shouldn't even be the focus of worthwhile living.) Isn't it a selfish bargain then? – one might ask. Well, yes. Everyone is selfish. But noble is he whose selfish interests are aligned with good interests of something greater than himself — like family, community, nation,... So, while selfishness, taken in a strict sense, is always present; it is not at odds with worthwhile living.
Giving collective wellbeing preference over one's own immediate wellbeing and calling it worthwhile living may sound counterintuitive to some people. Besides, on philosophical grounds also one might ask for the basis of such a conclusion, when the universe clearly doesn't have moral absolutes or externally imposed "moral oughts". It's a fair doubt, but can be explained away reasonably. We are interdependent agents in the world. It's true that humans have their own ego-identity, unlike other animals, so their primary focus tends to be on one's own self, but we do need other people to be happy and thrive. If we lived only self-indulgently we can not be happy for long because such living would naturally be followed by alienation. That's the reason sacrificial living is given so much importance in religious and traditional wisdom. Living sacrificial life without understanding this isn't advisable for happiness though, but if one understands life well, it's easy to see why being useful and valuable to the society (which is meant by enabling collective wellbeing) is called worthwhile living.
One's aim should be to live a worthwhile and virtuous life. And the reward may be a high-quality happiness, which comes as a by-product of making the best of life by doing worthwhile things — like being good and useful (to others).
0 Comment(s):
Post a Comment
Please preview and double-check your comment before posting. Use proper formatting, i.e. do not use all caps or all small letters, no short forms like cud, dnt, lyk, b4 etc., use right punctuation,.. or the comment won't be approved. View full comment policy.