Two popular concepts of the good life live from the Aristotelean days - the hedonic and the eudaimonic. The first one defines a good life as a happy life. The happiness of course is fleeting and this comes and goes. The second one is one that gives one some meaning - a meaningful life - again the search for such meaning could be never-ending. Perhaps both happiness and meaning are both left-brain interpretations of something to be fulfilled.

Recently I read about research that talks about a third type of good life. A psychologically fulfilled life, one that is full and rich with all types of experiences - the good and the bad, and everything in-between.

It seems to me that the uninterpreted right-brain experiences have more fulfillment. Kind of watching the sunset by the side of the lake, but taking in the whole picture without attaching any of the cognitive labels (no sun, wind, water, waves, boats, people, trees, colors, etc., etc.) to what we see, smell, and feel.

Now I will have to explore more around this topic and perhaps I will find the elusive pathway to a good life after all. Bring it on.

References:

In Defense of the Psychologically Rich Life - https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/in-defense-of-the-psychologically-rich-life/

Psychologists say a good life doesn’t have to be happy, or even meaningful - https://qz.com/2049935/what-does-a-good-life-look-like/

Research paper - The psychologically rich life - https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09515089.2020.1778662