The currency of a good life

Is education meant to secure employment, or is it meant to help us lead a good life? This enduring question has accompanied human civilisation across centuries. At first glance, employment appears to be the pathway to a good life. Yet the two are not always identical and, at times, may even seem opposed. While most of adult life is spent working, childhood and adolescence are largely devoted to preparing for that work. Culturally and socially, employment is often valued only when it promises the most gainful opportunities, a phrase that, in practice, largely translates into earning more money. Although employment and money appear inseparable, the dissatisfaction many experience from long working hours suggests a deeper tension. They seem united in purpose but divided in spirit. Employment, money, and the idea of a good life often appear bundled together, yet they reside separately, each influencing the other without fully merging.

There is little dispute about the importance of employment or the role of money in modern life. However, defining what constitutes a “good life” remains both a philosophical inquiry and a deeply personal reflection. The Socratic observation that “an unexamined life is not worth living” challenges individuals to reflect on what truly matters. Across philosophical traditions, answers have varied. Hindu thought speaks of dharma (ethical duty) and moksha (liberation). Buddhism emphasises the overcoming of dukkha (suffering). Daoism encourages harmony with the natural order of the universe, while Stoicism upholds virtue as the highest good. At the opposite end lies hedonism, which regards pleasure and indulgence as life’s ultimate aim. The former traditions suggest that a good life need not be centred on sensual gratification; the latter hold that sensory pleasure is the ultimate reality.

When money becomes the central focus, it can subtly encourage a hedonistic orientation, diverting attention from other vital dimensions of life, understanding oneself, nurturing meaningful relationships, and contributing to the larger community. Societies across cultures have long cherished these qualities as their highest ideals. Even at the individual level, people who embody empathy, integrity and social responsibility are admired. The concern, therefore, is not that money lacks importance. Rather, it is the growing tendency to treat money as the only important thing, as the measure that dictates and defines all other aspects of life. In such a framework, other virtues do not merely become secondary; they risk becoming subordinate. Money itself is not inherently harmful, and in moderate measure, it is essential for stability and dignity. Yet its pursuit can become limitless unless individuals consciously decide to set boundaries.

The philosopher Immanuel Kant warned against treating human beings merely as means to an end. His ethical principle insists that people must be respected as ends in themselves, possessing the freedom and dignity to make their own choices. Applying this insight, money should remain a means, while human relationships must remain ends. When money is elevated beyond its rightful place, the temptation to compromise this moral principle becomes real. The growing number of disputes in families, civil courts and criminal proceedings reflects not only legal disagreements but also the erosion of trust and understanding. Financial disputes frequently lie at the heart of such conflicts. Even more troubling are the countless tensions that never reach a courtroom, disputes that simmer silently within households, causing psychological strain without hope of resolution or justice.

This tension extends into education. A generation of students repeatedly told that success equals employability, and employability equals income, may gradually lose sight of the value of relationships and ethical commitments. A society that judges young people primarily by how “market-ready” they are or how much they are likely to earn narrows its understanding of human flourishing. Such an approach risks denying children the space to form their own conception of what constitutes a meaningful life. The trajectory of a child’s future is profoundly shaped by early schooling and the pathways made available for higher education. While socio-economic background undeniably shapes aspirations and anxieties about money, the expanding range of professional opportunities today also offers room for choice. A good life becomes more attainable when passion guides decisions rather than compulsion.

The rapid expansion of artificial intelligence adds a new dimension to this debate. As automation reshapes industries and employment patterns, financial security may become increasingly uncertain for many. It is only through a humanistic approach, one that prioritises dignity, empathy and respect in relationships, that society can navigate this transformation with resilience.

(The writer is a professor at the National Council of Educational Research and Training)

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.