Exam 32: Susan Wolf

Susan Wolf: Moral Saints A moral saint, as Wolf defines it, is someone who is as morally good as possible. Although such an ideal might seem worth striving for, Wolf argues that moral sainthood is in fact not an attractive ideal. She maintains that any moral saint would necessarily live a life dominated by the commitment to improving the welfare of others. Wolf distinguishes between two different models of moral sainthood. The Loving Saint is someone whose happiness consists in the happiness of others. The Rational Saint also pays little attention to her own happiness, instead attaching overriding importance to the concerns of morality. The Rational Saint is committed to doing her moral duty for the sake of her duty. She retains some non-moral and even selfish desires, but, out of duty, does not act on them. Although these different models will appeal to different thinkers-utilitarians will be attracted to the Loving Saint, while Kantians to the Rational Saint-she claims that neither of them presents us with a desirable ideal. What's wrong with moral sainthood? Wolf argues that there are many nonmoral goods in which moral saints would not be willing or able to partake. Moral saints would spend the large majority of their time improving the lives of others, and thus would have little time to read interesting books, or to create or appreciate art, cuisine, or music. Furthermore, as moral saints would take great care not to cause offense, they would be unlikely to have a dry, sarcastic wit, and will hence be rather bland. By passing up on so much, either out of lack of interest or simply an iron will, moral saints seem to miss out on developing "an identifiable, personal self." Wolf claims that although an acceptable moral theory should render the idea of a moral saint coherent, moral sainthood turns out to be a life not worth striving for. Given that we would not wish moral sainthood for our friends, our children, or ourselves, Wolf concludes that morality should play only a limited role in our lives. -Wolf claims that ultimately, normative questions must be assessed from:

Susan Wolf: Moral Saints A moral saint, as Wolf defines it, is someone who is as morally good as possible. Although such an ideal might seem worth striving for, Wolf argues that moral sainthood is in fact not an attractive ideal. She maintains that any moral saint would necessarily live a life dominated by the commitment to improving the welfare of others. Wolf distinguishes between two different models of moral sainthood. The Loving Saint is someone whose happiness consists in the happiness of others. The Rational Saint also pays little attention to her own happiness, instead attaching overriding importance to the concerns of morality. The Rational Saint is committed to doing her moral duty for the sake of her duty. She retains some non-moral and even selfish desires, but, out of duty, does not act on them. Although these different models will appeal to different thinkers-utilitarians will be attracted to the Loving Saint, while Kantians to the Rational Saint-she claims that neither of them presents us with a desirable ideal. What's wrong with moral sainthood? Wolf argues that there are many nonmoral goods in which moral saints would not be willing or able to partake. Moral saints would spend the large majority of their time improving the lives of others, and thus would have little time to read interesting books, or to create or appreciate art, cuisine, or music. Furthermore, as moral saints would take great care not to cause offense, they would be unlikely to have a dry, sarcastic wit, and will hence be rather bland. By passing up on so much, either out of lack of interest or simply an iron will, moral saints seem to miss out on developing "an identifiable, personal self." Wolf claims that although an acceptable moral theory should render the idea of a moral saint coherent, moral sainthood turns out to be a life not worth striving for. Given that we would not wish moral sainthood for our friends, our children, or ourselves, Wolf concludes that morality should play only a limited role in our lives. -Wolf claims we must resort to intuition to settle the question of how to balance moral and nonmoral values.

Susan Wolf: Moral Saints A moral saint, as Wolf defines it, is someone who is as morally good as possible. Although such an ideal might seem worth striving for, Wolf argues that moral sainthood is in fact not an attractive ideal. She maintains that any moral saint would necessarily live a life dominated by the commitment to improving the welfare of others. Wolf distinguishes between two different models of moral sainthood. The Loving Saint is someone whose happiness consists in the happiness of others. The Rational Saint also pays little attention to her own happiness, instead attaching overriding importance to the concerns of morality. The Rational Saint is committed to doing her moral duty for the sake of her duty. She retains some non-moral and even selfish desires, but, out of duty, does not act on them. Although these different models will appeal to different thinkers-utilitarians will be attracted to the Loving Saint, while Kantians to the Rational Saint-she claims that neither of them presents us with a desirable ideal. What's wrong with moral sainthood? Wolf argues that there are many nonmoral goods in which moral saints would not be willing or able to partake. Moral saints would spend the large majority of their time improving the lives of others, and thus would have little time to read interesting books, or to create or appreciate art, cuisine, or music. Furthermore, as moral saints would take great care not to cause offense, they would be unlikely to have a dry, sarcastic wit, and will hence be rather bland. By passing up on so much, either out of lack of interest or simply an iron will, moral saints seem to miss out on developing "an identifiable, personal self." Wolf claims that although an acceptable moral theory should render the idea of a moral saint coherent, moral sainthood turns out to be a life not worth striving for. Given that we would not wish moral sainthood for our friends, our children, or ourselves, Wolf concludes that morality should play only a limited role in our lives. -What is a moral saint? Is moral saintliness a desirable ideal? Why or why not?