Question: What is your question?
Michael Sandel: Well here, I suppose, is a question that is . . . that is worth asking . . . worth all of us asking ourselves as citizens in the world as we find it today. And that is, “Does the good life . . . can the good life simply be one that takes place in private life alone – in our own individual lives and those of our families? Or in order to lead a good, and fulfilling, and satisfying life, do we need to cultivate a care for the world, and to try to figure out how to have a hand . . . how to have meaningful say in trying to shape the whole of the common good, or the direction of things beyond our own corner of the world?” I think that is an open question. My own hunch is that the answer to the question – which won’t surprise you – is the second. That the care of the world, and the participation, and the care of the public life larger than ourselves, is an important part of the good life. But you know philosophers for a very long time have disagreed about this and debated about it. So I really take it to be an open question, but an inviting question for . . . that’s . . . but an inviting question that is really very much relevant to the lives we live and the world that we face today.
Recorded on: 6/12/07
Discuss
Juan M. Contreras on January 18, 2008, 3:55 PM
Dear Professor Sandel,
Like you, I have asked this question and have chosen the second answer. What I am unsure of, however, is how to justify it. Intuition, and probably a good deal of socialization, led me to the second answer. But what about you? How do you justify the good life as one that requires us to engage with the world?
Juan M. Contreras on January 18, 2008, 8:55 PM
Dear Professor Sandel,
Like you, I have asked this question and have chosen the second answer. What I am unsure of, however, is how to justify it. Intuition, and probably a good deal of socialization, led me to the second answer. But what about you? How do you justify the good life as one that requires us to engage with the world?
David Gallo on February 29, 2008, 9:48 AM
Professor,
I'm going to have to agree with you as well. Social, spiritual and technological advancement would not be possible without the aid of individuals in search of a collective good. We are but actors on eachothers stages, and we are required to interact with one another. It is safe to say the people are social beings. Beings that thrive with interpersonal communication to find commonality within ourselves to better understand ourselves as individuals and understand the world that we have all been thrown into. While many act selfishly, the human ability to act selflessly: shows our understanding and willingness to strive for a good greater than ourselves. My question is then can there indeed be a universal collective good or are inviduals personal desires and predispositions always conflicting preventing a collective conciousness?
David Gallo on February 29, 2008, 2:48 PM
Professor,
I’m going to have to agree with you as well. Social, spiritual and technological advancement would not be possible without the aid of individuals in search of a collective good. We are but actors on eachothers stages, and we are required to interact with one another. It is safe to say the people are social beings. Beings that thrive with interpersonal communication to find commonality within ourselves to better understand ourselves as individuals and understand the world that we have all been thrown into. While many act selfishly, the human ability to act selflessly: shows our understanding and willingness to strive for a good greater than ourselves. My question is then can there indeed be a universal collective good or are inviduals personal desires and predispositions always conflicting preventing a collective conciousness?
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register