Aristotle has a concept regarding the natural purpose of things. This concept offers that it is good for all things to fulfill their nature - like the acorn. It is the nature of the acorn to become a mighty oak tree. If the acorn had feelings, it would feel good once it became that mighty oak tree because the acorn had fulfilled its ultimate purpose. I, as a human, have a natural purpose to live rationally. Aristotle extrapolates this by deducing the difference between humans and everything else. Of all the known things in existence, only humans have the ability to act rationally. Therefore it must be our nature to do so, and following one's nature is good. To eliminate some criticisms, I will do my best to first define the word good. By performing my duties as a human, I will feel good about my life on a daily basis and as a whole. Good is a relative term that I find gets confused with right. Good and right are not synonyms.
Stating that being a rational person is good is almost as vague as saying that being a virtuous person is good. However, one could argue that rationality is in our nature as humans but virtue is not explicitly in part of our human nature. Virtue is more of a title for things we find to be right. Living my life as rationally as I can is living the good life. Rationality is that which separates us from every other essence in the world; therefore it is our duty as humans to use rational thought in our daily lives. To use reason is to consciously acknowledge and embrace the actions and the choices in our lives. The ability to use more than just our own perspective on life is using reason. There are many different types of perspectives that we can choose from, another person, an animal, the predicted perspective of future generations of people. For example, if I wanted to take something that belonged to someone else, my own wants and needs would weigh in. On the other hand, I would also understand the needs of the person I am stealing from. The ability to understand multiple perspectives and then make an informed decision is a rational life. Right or wrong do not enter into this equation. Some philosophers use the decisions we make to qualify a life as good or bad, to be virtuous would be to make the “right” decisions.
In my opinion, right and wrong have a fairly small role in the required characteristics of the good life. The good life is a life without much regard to being right or wrong. The only choice that is vital is the decision to use rationality. Rationality is the sole thing that separates humans from animals, rocks or plants. An acorn will do its duty as an acorn to become a mighty oak tree but is that the good life? An Epicurean will learn to avoid pain and seek out minute pleasures. An Epicurean will understand and therefore not fear death but is that the good life? I submit that rationality is that which is necessary for the good life. Any life lived in the absence of rational thought does not have what it takes to be the good life. The life of an acorn is not a good one because acorns have no rationality. The life of the Epicurean can be a good one if the Epicurean contemplates the consequences for his actions and thinks about each problem from multiple perspectives. The life of a Stoic can also be a good one for all of the same reasons. “The good life” is not a blanket statement that you can make, it is a case by case judgment.
I offer that all humans have the capacity to lead the good life. Why? Because humans have the ability to exercise rational thought. People often fail to draw a distinct line between the good life and the just life, or the powerful life, or the romantic life, or the religious life. The good life ought to be the primary goal for all of mankind. The good life and all those other lives are not even on the same playing field. The good life is uniquely achievable by humanity and therefore uniquely available for all to enjoy. It is the primary responsibility of every person to participate in and contribute to the good life by celebrating and using the ability for rational thought as the way to achieve the good life.
In this paper I have demonstrated two distinct accounts of the good life and presented my own opinion. My version of the good life is a subtle recipe of Stoicism, Epicureanism, and a little Aristotle. Rationality remains the single defining characteristic that positions humans as those with the capacity to achieve the good life.
