Naturalism is the view that our death marks a final and irreversible extinction. We are born into this world, we live our lives, and we ultimately perish from existence. This being the case, many naturalists urge people to live as fulfilling lives as possible. If this life is the only life people have, whatever constitutes the fullest or best way to live should be the way a person lives. However, what exactly constitutes a fulfilling life by the naturalist is not entirely agreed upon. Some naturalists claim that having individual happiness is what constitutes a fulfilling life, while others claim that being moral and serving others constitutes a fulfilling life. In a third view, our individual happiness is actually found in being moral and serving others, thus being moral ultimately constitutes a fulfilling life. If this life is the only one we have before eternal extinction, which one of these three views of a fulfilling life is correct? This project examines two naturalists who assert that being moral constitutes the most fulfilling life, and one who asserts that objective morality does exist.
Hoops, Chris, "An Examination of Morality in a Naturalistic Universe" (2015). Philosophy Summer Fellows. 4.
Available to all.