How to Be Perfect: The Correct Answer to Every Moral Question

by Michael Schur

“Certain principles of justice,” he writes, “are justified because they would be agreed to in an initial situation of equality.”

So, let’s say we’re about to start a society,

This describes Rawls' Original Position

luck—it

Buffett called his luck the "ovarian lottery." Rawls referred to the "natural lottery."

When designing societal guidelines for how we pay and treat people of different professions, then, we might think the following: (a) We could end up being

so we should ensure that the minimum salaries for them aren’t so low that they end up miserable,

Behind the veil of ignorance, we will all immediately realize that there’s no way for any of us to gain an upper hand here—no

this isn’t utilitarianism,

we set a high enough floor for everyone that means nobody will end up suffering due only to the caprices of luck.

He wasn’t interested in trying to maximize overall happiness

but rather wanted to design a society that every member would theoretically sign up for, with the comfort of knowing it would be relatively just.

If we determine that relative to others we’re lucky, which means we can afford to do a little extra, then we should do a little extra. And I don’t mean “Warren Buffett” lucky—just lucky enough that we’re able to do something to make other people’s lives a bit easier, at little or no real cost to our own.

apologizing is the final ascent on the mountain we have to climb in order to become better people. It’s the punctuation mark on the end of an Aristotelian sentence that describes our search for virtue; it’s an easily formulated Kantian maxim, a utilitarian happiness increaser, and a contractualist debt we can pay off, all in one.

Without an apology, the wound of a moral wrong can’t completely heal.

The implicit premiss in this modus-tollens-form argument is that WE OUGHT TO HEAL. Is Schur right that without apologies there is an inevitable healing gap?

Tom Petty

I love this statement. It’s clear and straightforward. He doesn’t dig in his heels or make excuses; instead he just explains how it happened, acknowledges that he blew it, names the people he hurt, and expresses regret. This is the correct way to apologize.

Ted Yoho

to sum up: I’m here to apologize. But I won’t apologize. I didn’t do the thing you think I did—you construed it wrong. At one point, I was poor. Also I won’t apologize for loving God and America. Yoho out. This is a very bad apology.

Yoho

When he was caught,

delivered a line of bullshit intended to make other people—his political allies, and not the woman he cursed at—see him a certain way.

“I’m sorry if you were offended,”

Apologies don’t undo whatever bad thing we did, but when they’re sincere and honestly delivered, they can help heal a wound. They won’t do anything, however, if we’re defensive, hedging, or disingenuous—if

National sins require national apologies, no matter how long ago they were committed.

What do we hope will happen when we apologize?

that whoever we’ve wronged will recognize our sincere regret and our desire to be a little better today than we were yesterday. We hope for whatever mix of kindness, empathy, grace, and understanding leads people to say it’s okay

We hope for forgiveness.

It’s right and appropriate to speak up (in the right way, at the right times, in the right amount) when people fall short of virtue and cause some pain or suffering. But if they’ve done something forgivable, we should remember what we hope for when we screw up, and try to summon that same grace and understanding.

to demand perfection, or to hold people to impossible standards, is to deny the simple and beautiful reality that nobody is perfect.

the world you’re inheriting feels impossible to navigate even for the very luckiest humans alive—a group you two belong to—and

understanding morality, and following its compass during decisions great and small, will make you better,

Not safer from harm, necessarily—though I hope for that too—but from all of the traps that modern life sets,

virtue starter kits arrived intact.

and it wouldn’t take much for you to forget the role luck has played in your lives, which can lead to you feeling entitled to things and tossing your moral compasses aside

What am I doing? Why am I doing it? Is there something I could be doing that’s better? Why is it better?

climate change.)

every ten years or so, you look back on the person you were ten years before and shudder—at

You are people on earth. You are not alone here, and that means you owe the other people on earth certain things.

What you owe them, more or less, is to live by rules they wouldn’t reject as unfair (assuming they’re decent, reasonable people). If you, Ivy, are about to do something and you’re not sure whether it’s okay, ask yourself if William would tell you it’s a good idea. William, ask yourself if Ivy would say the same thing. Then keep going—ask yourself if one of your friends would reject it as a bad idea—or one of your teachers, or even a kid you don’t like that much but who you have to admit is pretty smart. If you feel like those people could reasonably reject your idea for what to do, maybe don’t do it. Maybe do something else.

From which ethical perspective does this advice come?

this: You can think to yourself, before you do something, “Would it be okay if everyone did this? What would the world be like if every single person were allowed to do whatever I’m about to do?” If that world seems twisted, or unfair, or nonsensical, you should probably do something else.

From which ethical perspective does this advice come?

Think about what you’re about to do, and imagine the result. Think of how many people will be happy, and how many sad, and how happy or sad they’ll be. Think about how soon they’ll be sad or happy, and for how long they’ll be sad or happy. Try to total it all up in your mind, and think about whether what you’re about to do will result in more total sadness or happiness. This one is tricky, but sometimes it’s the best way to find an answer.

From which ethical perspective does this advice come?

while you’re here on earth, think about the parts of people you love—their kindness, generosity, loyalty, courage, determination, mildness. Aim yourselves at the exact right amount of those qualities, as best you can—not too much, not too little. And know that you’re often going to get it wrong. You’ll try to be mild, let’s say, and you won’t be mild enough, then you’ll overcompensate and become too mild, and that’ll keep happening, and it’ll annoy people, and that will sting. But hopefully, by trying over and over, you’ll get closer and closer to getting it right. The trying is important. Keep trying.

From which ethical perspective does this advice come?

Being a good person is a job, and a hard one at that. But if you care about it, it may start to seem less like work and more like a puzzle you can solve. And in those rare times when you have to make a decision and you assemble the pieces in exactly the right way, so the image of what to do comes sharply into focus—you will feel alive and fulfilled and elated. You will feel like you’re flourishing.