What makes a good life? What have prominent philosophers taught about living well?
Depending on which philosophy you follow, there are many perspectives on what a good life is. Some say a good life is living according to reason, others say it’s dedicating yourself to something greater, and yet others say there is no such thing as a good life.
Read on to learn how to live a good life from Aristotle, Nietzsche, and other philosophers.
Considering What Makes a Good Life
In our complicated world, we’re bombarded with messages about how we should live our lives. But is there a single “best” or “right” way to live? If so, what makes a good life?
In this article, we’ll examine different answers to these questions from significant philosophers and spiritualists like Aristotle (Nicomachean Ethics) and Friedrich Nietzsche (Thus Spoke Zarathustra). We’ll distill their complex arguments into three main perspectives on what a good life looks like: living according to reason, dedicating yourself to a larger project or goal, and abandoning any fixed idea of “goodness” altogether. Our exploration of each perspective explains why its proponents consider it the best way to live, and we’ll outline how to apply their “good life” principles in your own life.
Perspective #1: A Good Life Is Aligned With Reason
The first perspective on what makes a good life involves living rationally—considering the options available to you, weighing their possible outcomes, and choosing the best option—rather than making moral decisions based on momentary whims, impulses, or intuitions.
Stoic philosopher Marcus Aurelius and ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle offer two different approaches to living a good, rational life:
1) Choose Reason Over Emotion
Marcus Aurelius (Meditations) believes a good, rational life is lived strictly according to reason and nothing else. He explains that the universe itself functions according to reason alone—that is, rules and systems work in harmony to ensure that whatever is supposed to happen, happens. Therefore, by living in alignment with reason, you become in harmony with the universe and your role in it. This makes you not only morally good but also good at the “job” of existing as a human being.
2) Align Reason and Emotion
Unlike Marcus Aurelius, the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle’s (Nicomachean Ethics) ideal rational life allows for emotion—but only after you’ve “trained” your emotions to align with reason. In other words, if you rationally think something is moral, you’ll feel positively about it. But if you rationally think something is immoral, you’ll feel negatively about it. Aristotle believes aligning emotion and reason—rather than eliminating emotion—is important because a good person isn’t emotionally unaffected by moral goods and evils. They desire good and are repulsed by evil, and these emotions help motivate them to live morally.
Perspective #2: A Good Life Is Dedicated to Something Greater
The second perspective on a good life emphasizes dedication to a project, concept, or ideal larger than yourself as an individual. This understanding of a good life is based less on your internal development—improving and following your reasoning skills, for example—and more on your interactions with the external world.
In this section, we’ll explore two versions of this philosophical perspective: living a good life by dedicating yourself to society and living a good life by dedicating yourself to the universe.
Dedicate Yourself to Society
Many philosophers believe that, to live a good life, you must dedicate yourself to the larger project of contributing to and improving your society. In the Analects, ancient Chinese philosopher Confucius says you can do this by respecting your superiors and fulfilling your obligations to family and community.
Dedicate Yourself to the Universe
Other scholars take a cosmic perspective on what it means to be part of something larger than yourself. Spiritualist author Alan Watts (The Book) argues that the best way to live is by viewing yourself as one with the universe. He explains that every living being, object, and idea in the universe exists in relation to others—in other words, any individual being, object, or idea only exists as a result of interacting or contrasting with the things around it.
Perspective #3: There Is No Good Life
Unlike the previous philosophers discussed, some authors argue that you shouldn’t worry about living a good life at all—they either believe a good life doesn’t exist, or believe it’s impossible to know what a good life is. These authors believe the best way to live is by rejecting any fixed standard of “good” or “bad.”
19th-century German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche and 20th-century French author Albert Camus offer two different perspectives on why you shouldn’t pursue goodness and how you should live instead:
Goodness Doesn’t Exist
Nietzsche (Thus Spoke Zarathustra) argues there’s no universal standard of a “good” life. To him, morality is all relative—what’s good to one person might be evil to another, and it’s impossible to get around this. Nietzsche argues that, rather than worrying about morality, the best people contribute the most to the evolution of mankind.
In his argument, Nietzsche refers to evolution in the Darwinian sense—certain people survive and reproduce more due to naturally selected traits, and this pattern changes the nature of the species. According to him, social conformity and mediocrity cause mankind’s evolution to stagnate, putting the whole species at risk—if everyone is doing the same things and not pushing any new boundaries, mankind won’t be able to change and adapt to future challenges.
Therefore, he argues, the best possible person is unique, individualistic, and naturally skilled. These people reject social norms and morals, dedicating themselves to their passions and developing personally beneficial traits like strength and joy. This single-minded devotion allows them to develop remarkable intellect, strength, and talent for their passions, which they’ll then pass on to the next generation of humanity.
Goodness Is Unknowable
Instead of claiming that a good life does or doesn’t exist, some philosophers believe it’s pointless to debate the question at all. In The Myth of Sisyphus, Camus argues it’s impossible to understand the purpose or meaning of human life. This is because the answer to this question lies beyond the scope of human experience. For example, if God exists and provides humanity with purpose, then we still wouldn’t know that our lives have purpose because we can’t concretely know whether or not God exists. Since we can’t know the purpose of human life, we have no frame of reference to say what kind of life is “good” or “bad.”
Exercise: Consider Your Good Life
Reflect on the different ways of living a good life suggested by the authors and how you’d like to live your own life.
- Do you try to live according to reason, making logical choices whenever possible? If not, do you believe this is a worthy goal? Why or why not?
- Are you part of something larger than yourself as an individual? Do you believe this is important for living a good life? Explain why.
- Do you think it’s even possible to define a good life? Why or why not?
