(Bear with me, this is my first blog post, and I’m not exactly the best writer out there.)

Recently, I’ve been feeling a bit lost. I don’t know exactly where I want my life to end up, or what path to take to get there. I’m still young, so I have time to figure it out. Still, it’s made me wonder: What constitutes a “good life”? Is it personal fulfilment? Accumulating wealth? Making a difference? Or is it leaving behind a legacy, good or bad? Perhaps that doesn’t even matter.

The standard view in ancient Greek philosophy was that there are three types of life: a contemplative life, a life of virtuous political activity, and a hedonistic life. Plato and Aristotle believed that a contemplative life was the best, followed by a life of virtuous action, with a life of hedonistic pursuits being the worst. They also held that a hedonistic life only appealed to those who did not understand the pleasures of contemplation or virtuous action.

I’m somewhat sceptical of this view. How could you group every human life into one of three categories and call one of them “best?” The standard Greek view lacks any regard for one’s personal experience, as some may enjoy a hedonistic lifestyle much more than they would a contemplative lifestyle. For instance, it is entirely possible that someone would find a greater sense of fulfilment in leading a life of pure pleasure, doing very little by means of complex thought and nothing at all to help others, than they would in a life characterised by constant philosophical inquiry or political activity. The idea that the “good life” revolves entirely around improving the lives of others, or pursuing knowledge, while doing little to enjoy yourself, just feels wrong to me.

I do, however, understand this perspective from a utilitarian standpoint. Of course, living a life in which you cultivate character and intellect, living harmoniously with the rest of society, would benefit the greatest number of people, even if it meant sacrificing your own pleasure. But, despite typically agreeing with utilitarian ideals, this still doesn’t sit right with me.

I think that what can be considered a “good life” should not be based on how much benefit you provide to society, but upon the balance between personal fulfilment and societal benefit. After all, if every person gave up their own fulfilment to benefit the whole, would anybody really benefit?

So, if the Greeks’ idea doesn’t cut it for me, what exactly would I consider the “good life?” I take on a sort of light consequentialist perspective, but without strictly following utilitarian ideals, as I still want to enjoy myself even if it means I won’t be helping anyone else sometimes. Put simply, I think I want to help more people than I hurt, but not so much that I end up foregoing anything that I might enjoy. I do relate quite strongly to the Greek view of a contemplative life, as will become apparent the more you read this blog, so of course, I would like to learn as much as possible, and perhaps get to a point where I might be able to consider myself an “expert” on certain topics. I’d also like to experience a lot of new places, new ideas. I’m not sure what exactly yet, but I just know I want to have tons of experiences.

Ultimately, what the “good life” is varies from person to person. Some may say that to achieve the “good life,” you must live to benefit society, and some may take a more hedonistic approach and say that to lead the “good life,” you must experience as much pleasure as possible. There is, in my opinion, no such thing as a universally “good life,” and it’s up to you to decide what would make you the most content.

This post doesn’t go super in-depth on a lot of stuff, particularly things like what gives life meaning. I’ll discuss stuff like that more in-depth in later posts, but I wanted to get something out for the blogs page without taking a million years to write.