Although Wellism acknowledges that a philosophical discussion about the meaning of terms such as “right” and “wrong”, “good” and “evil”, as well as “rights” can be important and lead us to important insights, it seems that there is no simple way to resolve the debate at a philosophical level.
For example, what is the source of human rights? Some argued that they are “natural rights”, based on human nature. Others argued that they are based on divine commandments. The US Declaration of Independence contains the proclamation: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” But “self-evident” – to whom? “Unalienable” – according to whom? What is self-evident to one person is not self-evident to another (as the unfortunate situation in the world demonstrates: dictatorships, terrorist groups, and some stifling social norms routinely ignore and suppress these human rights). And who is this “Creator” and what are his commandments? (Unfortunately, the world still contains violent extremism of some religious fanatics who believe that the Creator commanded them to kill people who do not share their beliefs).
Instead of “going down the rabbit hole” and getting bogged down in endless philosophical debates, or basing our ethics on shaky conceptual foundations, Wellism takes a pragmatic approach by asking about the purpose of ethical questions:
- What is good and evil? – For what purpose?
- What is right and wrong? – For what purpose?
- What rights do humans have? – For what purpose?
- How should people treat each other? – For what purpose?
In other words, if it’s too difficult to know what is good, right, and just in absolute terms, we can ask instead: For what purpose do we choose? And then, relative to that purpose, we can ask the practical question: what is good and bad in light of that purpose, namely: what would advance us towards achieving that purpose, and what would hinder us?
As a simple example, if we choose a purpose of winning in a game of chess, then we can say that in a certain chess board state, a certain move is “good” for us for the purpose of winning the game, while another move is “bad” for that purpose. Some moves may be “better” or “worse” than others. And in some situations, it may not be obvious if a move is good or bad.
Of course, our purpose in life is not only to win in a game of chess (although winning such a game may be one of the many small goals we choose in our life). So that leads us to the next questions:
- What is our purpose in life?
- What should be our purpose in life?
In the next section, we’ll explore how Wellism approaches these fundamental questions of purpose. Continue here.