Question

what is the conflict between our moral ideals and our moral assumption that wolf addresses?

Answer 1

The main issue I wish to address is the conflict between moral and nonmoral virtues and motives. More specifically, I will explore the extent of this conflict, its implications, and possible misunderstandings. As a primary text, I will use Susan Wolf's ``Moral Saints'' to examine this conflict in light of her notions of excellence of both moral and nonmoral virtues.

I will begin by attempting to clarify what is meant by moral excellence or moral saintliness. A moral saint, says Wolf, is an idealization, someone ``whose every action is as morally good as possible'', someone who is ``as morally worthy as can be'' (Wolf, 419). This paragon of moral excellence is an ideal, and one who wishes to be as morally good as can be will emulate this ideal. Moral saints are good, kind, just, and possess all of the other such traits that are typically associated with moral excellence. Moral sainthood requires that ``one's life be dominated by a commitment to improving the welfare of others'' (Wolf, 420).

Wolf distinguishes between two kinds of moral saints, the Loving Saint and the Rational Saint. Loving Saints are those who derive their happiness from making others happy; they act out of a motive of love. Rational Saints act out of duty; their saintliness comes at the cost of sacrificing their interests for those of others (Wolf, 420).

Being, or attempting to be, a moral saint is no easy task. Furthermore, Wolf states quite confidently that most of us don't, and shouldn't, want to strive for such moral excellence. The pursuit of moral excellence to the exclusion of all else is not a goal to which we aspire; it is a goal that we should be leery of. As Wolf says, Moral saintliness does not constitute a model of personal well-being toward which it would be particularly rational or good or desirable for a human being to strive'' (Wolf, 419).