The good life: Plato and Paul Throughout philosophical theory, the search for the "good life" or permanent and final happiness has been at the forefront again and again line motivation and human thinking. In speculating about how to make our lives better, it is not uncommon to believe that existing in usual ways, given the lifestyles that humans naturally form when they become adults, is not automatically the preeminent way to exist. If we were to give deliberate and conscious thought to the problem, a superior method might appear. The “good life” can range from an ethical system to a quality of existence in relation to others. Many philosophers, writers, and religious figures have speculated about what the “good life” truly is. Among these figures are the philosopher Plato and Saint Paul. Plato's best individual life is that of method and technique. The most consolidated opinion of the good life and the life of ethical virtue is that they are two different concepts; that the life of ethical virtue sometimes hinders contentment and therefore the good life. Plato's intellectual approach to the good life moves away from the more common reliance on experience to gain the knowledge needed to live a good life and find happiness. His reserve about this idea, despite its significance in his metaphysics and ethics, is primarily responsible for the vagueness of his notion of happiness and what it means to lead a good life, except for the claim that people are better off if they do what they they want. and according to self-preservation. How the knowledge of thinkers offers a concrete foundation for the good life of the public and the mass, however vacuous, of citizens remains an open question; beyond the idea that... middle of paper... being content with ourselves. If we are constantly fighting our impulses because a supreme being tells us to, we are not fighting those impulses for the right reason and we are also less likely to follow commands, however right they may be. Even though we are fighting our impulses, we are still not satisfied and that means we are not at peace. Paul offers a good framework because we definitely shouldn't kill people or steal, but if we simply follow those rules to please others, then how can we live our best individual lives? Plato's conception of the good life is broader; it's about being one with our true nature. If we live according to the potential of our nature, then we will have achieved our individual goals to achieve happiness. True happiness is contentment of our nature according to Plato, and this makes much more sense for the individual and reason for a good life.