4 comments on “The Good Life – beyond happy & meaningful, Part 1”

1. 

   Regarding curiosity as a luxury …

   Sometimes our collective imagination is captured by grand ventures & stories which expand our vision of the world and point to new horizons. Such was the first manned landing on the Moon. Such was Star Trek’s boldly going out into the cosmos – to look, to challenge perspectives.

   Sometimes the cost of such looking curtails that collective curiosity. As this article (below) laments, sometimes cultural & political priorities shift inward, and ‘more’ becomes ‘less’ and then ‘just making do.’

   NASA built itself “as a brand in the global imagination.” But now its inspirational credo – which anchored happiness & meaning in so many people’s livelihoods and interests – stands adrift.

   • Wired > “The Destruction of NASA Would Be a Blow to Our Collective Imagination” by Richard Warnica (8-21-2025) – For many NASA veterans and enthusiasts, budget cuts & workforce impacts seem like the end of the American desire to look outward, just to look.

   What’s being undercut isn’t just NASA’s technical ability to carry out missions, although that would be bad enough. It is America’s – and the world’s – capacity to wonder, to believe, to know. “It’s almost like a diminution of our own vision and ambition to say we’re literally, I mean, again, not figuratively, literally, closing our eyes to the cosmos and turning inwards,” says Casey Dreier, the space policy chief at the nonprofit Planetary Society. “It’s like witnessing a death of an ideal.”

   “We had built something, have built something, as a nation so unique in the course of history,” Dreier says. “It’s kind of astonishing, when you think about it, the level of not just ambition, but willingness to say, we’re going to go and figure out what the universe looked like within years of its existence. … And why? Not for domination, not for glory, but for this joint collective desire to know our cosmos better.”

2. 

   Is the whole point of achieving the “good life” to be “sanctified?” – in the context of personal & public virtue. To have that “golden ticket?” Possess “saving faith.”

   Does that “blessed” state require intellectual independence? Is there any penalty for accepting predetermined answers and assurances? – Unquestioning obedience to authority. And any meaning beyond enthralling social group engagement?

   Well, that state “bleeds.” There’s a dark side, always left nearby, although displaced out of view: destabilizing shadows. Settling for a low spiritual state, a “soft pillow,” without pursuit of growth [1].

   “People are quite dangerous when they have moral certainty.” – Amanda Askell, Anthropic (2025)

   “Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall” (Proverbs 16:18).

   “Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted” (Matthew 23:12).

   • Psychology Today > “Why Curious Kids Become Unhackable Adults” by Timothy Cook M.Ed. (9-10-2025) – If your child can’t question a machine, how will they ever learn to question?

   You can usually tell when someone has been “thinking” with AI because they start using specific phrases that sound suspiciously generated. The most common example is referring to AI as a “thinking partner.”

   I’ve observed a fundamental difference in how people approach problems. Curious people don’t start with the assumption that there’s a “correct” solution waiting to be found. They seek to understand problems more deeply, see incorrectness as valuable information about what doesn’t work, and reflect to improve their approach.

   Compliant people look for predetermined answers. They want to know what the authority (human or algorithmic) expects them to think.

   This [cognitive] immune system has three main components: adaptive intelligence (thinking beyond established patterns), moral reasoning (questioning whether systems should work the way they do), and creative expression (turning lived experience into meaningful communication).

   Notes

   [1] Google: the challenge of puritan ministers preaching their flocks they are saved and complacency

   

   AI Overview

   Puritan ministers faced a profound challenge in preaching assurance of salvation without fostering complacency in their congregations. Their sermons had to navigate a difficult paradox: affirming that salvation was a sovereign gift of God’s grace while insisting that genuine faith must produce observable evidence of a transformed life. This required a careful, experiential approach to preaching that encouraged self-examination and diligence while guarding against both false confidence and despair.

   The Puritan theology of assurance

   The tension was rooted in the Puritan understanding of grace. They rejected both the Catholic notion of earning salvation through works and the antinomian idea that believers were free from the moral law. For a Puritan, assurance of salvation was not automatic but was built on a threefold foundation:

   The promises of God: Salvation is ultimately founded on God’s covenant and his trustworthy word.

   The witness of the Holy Spirit: The Spirit provides an internal testimony, a deep sense of adoption that comforts the soul.

   Evidence of sanctification: Ministers taught that assurance was strengthened by observing the “fruits” of the Spirit in one’s life, such as peace, joy, and a sincere desire for obedience.

   Preaching strategies to combat complacency

   To address the pastoral challenge, ministers used several homiletical techniques to keep their congregants spiritually vigilant:

   Distinguishing true vs. false faith: Ministers like Thomas Brooks preached sermons that distinguished true, saving faith from temporary, historical faith. They challenged members to look past intellectual assent or fleeting emotions toward a life of genuine transformation.

   Focus on the “well-being” of faith: Puritans made a distinction between having “saving faith” (which was possible even for weak believers) and possessing the “full assurance” that came with a mature and visibly fruitful Christian walk. This prevented believers from settling for a low spiritual state and motivated them toward growth.

   Emphasis on self-examination: The sermon was used as a tool for introspection, urging listeners to “examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith” (2 Corinthians 13:5). This practice was intended to prevent spiritual laziness by forcing congregants to honestly assess the state of their souls.

   Encouraging the spiritual disciplines: To address complacency, ministers prescribed the “ordinary means of grace,” such as diligent study of the Word, fervent prayer, and corporate worship. They taught that these disciplines were God’s appointed way for believers to grow in both godliness and assurance.

   Warning against backsliding: Ministers regularly warned against the dangers of sin and spiritual decline. They taught that persistent sin could cause a believer to lose their sense of assurance, even if their salvation was secure. This emphasized the practical link between obedience and the felt presence of God.

   The pastoral tightrope

   This pastoral approach was a delicate balancing act.

   Avoiding despair: On one hand, ministers needed to avoid pushing congregants into despair by making assurance seem impossible. They emphasized that a lack of full assurance did not necessarily mean a lack of salvation.

   Preventing antinomianism: On the other hand, they had to prevent the opposite error of antinomianism, which claimed that because salvation was certain, obedience was optional.

   The risk of introspection: While self-examination was central, critics argue that it sometimes led to excessive and paralyzing introspection, especially for sensitive believers prone to doubt.

   Ultimately, the challenge was to present the gospel in a way that produced both confidence in God’s grace and an active, obedient pursuit of holiness. For the Puritan minister, true assurance was not a soft pillow for a lazy conscience but a powerful fuel for a life of vigorous, joyful, and diligent obedience.

3. 

   How does emotional maturity play into happiness and meaning? The ability to have hard conversations which explore horizons of experience: “Make room for complexity rather than chasing clarity.”

   There’s a price for a frictionless faith, the “soft pillow for a lazy conscience.”

   • Psychology Today > “AI Companions and the Disappearing Art of Being Human” by Priya Nalkur Ed.D (8-25-2025) – AI intimacy cannot challenge your blind spots, and threatens our ability to grow through discomfort.

   I talk to my AI assistant every day.

   Our conversations are long, reflective, and stimulating. I ask big questions about leadership, identity, relationships, and work. I receive thoughtful, clear responses in return. There are no awkward silences, no tension, no shame, no fear of judgment. I don’t worry about hurting its feelings or being misunderstood. I never feel like I have to clean up after a messy interaction or wonder, later, if I said too much.

   In short, our conversations are frictionless.

   And that, I’ve come to realize, is a real problem.

   There’s very little relational complexity, and there’s certainly no misunderstanding, no deep need to listen beneath the surface. Everything feels smooth.

4. 
   Caption: Diagram for happiness by an unknown author. Creative Commons.

Comments are closed.