ABSTRACT
This chapter expands on Flanagan’s model of eudaimonia, which integrates classic models of eudaimonia in the wake of Aristotle with Buddhist models of a good life. Like Flanagan, we consider work from philosophy and psychology, proposing that subjectivist and objectivist criteria both play important roles in the theoretical modeling and empirical measurement of qualities of a good life. We emphasize the importance of human development in a social ecology, which allows for a theoretical bridge between the higher (yet psychologically realistic) ideals of eudaimonia with the living of a good life in non-ideal circumstances. As for the rarefied ideals, we expand on links between Buddhist upekkha and Epicurean ataraxia. As for non-ideal circumstances, we examine constraints that women face in attempting to live out society’s ideals of eudaimonia.
