Wolf's Argumentative Analysis

1371 Words3 Pages

In a powerful scene from the 1982 film Gandhi, a young Mahatma Gandhi stands before a tense crowd of British officers and local Indian civilians at a public protest. Following an act of pure linguistic mastery and emotional evocation, the silence is broken by the locals’ loud cheers of encouragement at the words just now spoken by the political and spiritual leader. Faced by a crowd of varied faiths and religious views, Gandhi urges the angry and oppressed voices to abandon retaliation through violence and instead seek unity in peaceful resistance. “They will have my dead body,” he says, “but not my obedience.” To many, he was the epitome of righteousness and the closest degree to godliness that man could possibly achieve. In both India and …show more content…

She first begins with her understanding of what it means to be a moral saint. Wolf states that the life of a moral saint is defined by a complete and perfect commitment to morality such that any action a moral saint is engaged in is an action that is “as morally good as possible.” She continues to expand this definition of the moral saint by targeting more directly the person behind the action and claims that the moral saint himself/herself is as morally-driven and morally-dignified as possible. The basis for the undesirability of sainthood hinges on the elements of the definition that she provides. In a broader sense, Wolf believes that the moral saint is fully invested in the mission of complete self-devotion to morality through the betterment of society and the aid of others and this takes priority over all other aspects of life. The moral saint’s time on earth, therefore, becomes a valuable object that is constantly in short supply; it is a fleeting object that can only be rightly spent on actions along the moral path. This is where Wolf’s reasoning crystallizes into her main argument for the undesirability of sainthood. The moral saint’s life which is “dominated by a commitment to improving the welfare of others or of society as a whole” cannot possibly entertain any creative faculties of human …show more content…

She questions whether or not morality is a “suitable object of passion”; is it reasonable to completely commit oneself and one’s actions to the cause of morality? Wolf finds fault in such a commitment, claiming that the scope of mortality is far too limited to be made into a coveted purpose of life. Wolf claims that morality, in congruence with the core reasoning of her arguments, excludes various human interests. More succinctly, maximal devotion to morality is a misguided life commitment that fails to pay due to the significance of personal human desires. Once again, this argument echoes the central idea behind Wolf’s dissatisfaction with moral sainthood: a moral saint’s lifestyle lacks the drive for important human interests that allow mankind to truly excel and thus Wolf concludes that sainthood is not an attractive lifestyle for anyone to aspire

Open Document