Analysis Of Susan Wolf's 'Moral Saints'

In her paper, Moral Saints, Susan Wolf challenges the view that we should strive for moral value above all other values. Wolf presents the ideal of a moral saint as "a person whose every action is as morally good as possible." Within this ideal, she presents the two models of moral saints: the loving saint and the rational saint. Both completely devotes one's self to helping others, the difference being that the loving saint is inspired by happiness and the rational saint is inspired by duty. Wolf's belief on moral sainthood has implications for moral philosophy; If we should not aim for moral perfection, then what does this mean for the development of character, law, etc. In this essay, I will present Susan Wolf's argument on moral sainthood, object to Wolf's belief about the necessity of moral saints, and then present objections to my argument on the loving moral saint. I will argue that Wolf's criticism of moral saints is unsuccessful since while she was …show more content…
First, it is not appealing to be or be around a moral saint. The saint's dedication to other people leads to a life that lacks what Wolf considers 'necessary' aspects of human character. Moral saints cannot have personal interests since they cannot justify the human resources to non-moral activities, thus live very unbalanced lives. This is where the general discontent with moral saints begins since it conflicts with our egoistic, hedonistic nature. Moral saints in their commitment to constant morality must sacrifice their desires for the morally worth actions. The nature of sacrifice is different for the loving saint who is incapable of experiencing joy from these interests and the rational saint whose pathological fear and self-hatred would interfere with their ability to enjoy the interests. Wolf believes that it makes little rational sense that the best life could be so unattractive and unpleasant thus showing that the moral life is not the best