The last two chapters

 The last two chapters sum up the authors opinions on happiness, well-being, and a good life. 

He starts off by telling us a little bit about his family history leading into the fact I believe that there are family members who influenced who he is and his views regarding what matters.

First to discusses virtue and again distinguishes well-being of being separate from happiness, as well-being he says he doesn't have to consist of virtue. He says that most parents do teach their children to have virtues. I particularly think that this is an important point to make, because most people do value their children, and the fact that they do teach them to be virtuous; I believe, shows that people must have been also value virtue, for it to be important to them that their children have it. Which mean that most people value morals. He says flourishing life, yet be a bad person; however, goes on to say "to act against those values may be to make ourselves failures on our own terms," and that "a life of immorality probably tends to exact a high price." He is basically saying that because we as humans do put high value on being a good person, then bad people carry a heavy burden of knowing that they lack those qualities, and the cost is that they have to live with the dissatisfaction of themselves.

But then goes on to say that doing what is immoral can sometimes lead a person to benefits which results in happiness for them.  He says that most philosophers would agree that doing what's right and virtuous is far more important than being happy if doing the wrong thing is what it takes to achieve happiness; and then branches off into a discussion of ethics- have sometimes doing the right thing may involve making an otherwise immoral choice.

And then in the whole another section it's time discussing how certain people feel that they are entitled to be happy; and states that no one is entitled to happiness, points out that we are only entitled to the pursuit of it. But then goes on to say that just because someone is given rights to something, for instance a homeowner who knows that the community is unhappy with their decision to build exercising their rights regardless. Validating that doing the right thing even in lieu of one's rights is always the best thing regardless. And says that just because someone has the freedom to choose to be in bad person or do what's wrong doesn't mean that they should. And says that the name for that sort of person, who chooses to do wrong just because they can, we deem as assholes. And says that "one should not be an asshole in the pursuit of happiness." Lol.

In the following section he introduces a important part of living well has to do with meaning, which he says is building connections with people and things that matter to us. And that are pursuits should be worthwhile. That our pursuits should be more about their intrinsic worth to us, and not based purely upon the happiness that we expect to receive from them. That they should be worth doing whether they bring happiness or not. And he uses the example of having children because he says that having children sometimes comes with responsibilities that can result in unhappiness; however, we claim that our children bring us happiness, because we value them, and we see having children as meaningful and worthwhile.

Haybron says that meaning should have a subjective and objective aspect. And says that a meaningful life, "involves appreciative engagement with what you see as having merit or worth." And says that our lives seem meaningful and worthwhile when we appreciate and interact with the people and things that mean the most to us, or that we deem important within them. 

It says the reason why and meaning matters, is because "emotional fulfillment is a mixture of joy and attunement that arises when we appreciatively engage with what we see as valuable." But again says that pursuits that are meaningful do not always make us happier. And basically if we are not able to achieve happiness, that a person could be content with having a meaningful life. And that that meaningfulness in our pursuits often lead to more successful lives; and therefore a greater sense of well-being.

Then he discusses how meaning can be tricky in our modern society and how it's better to be an appreciator than a consumer. Basically it's better to be a giver than a taker. I think what he is getting at here is that his suggesting that merely appreciating the meaningfulness of one's life can lead to a certain sense of happiness. He gives the example of fast food which is something that you basically consume, and then an example of a well cooked meal that he enjoyed and appreciated the art and craftsmanship of the person who cooked it. Indicating that the quality- a life abundant of meaningful things and people in which you value, is what makes it happy. That value and appreciation is what brings the value and makes it happy, by giving it meaning. He is basically showing that appreciativeness is the opposite of claiming entitlement to happiness.

He says that he can't specify exactly what makes a good life but his suggestion is that happiness is only a part of well-being. And reiterates that doing what's right and exercising virtue still trumps well-being. Any form of well-being basically with or without happiness isn't meaningful I believe is what he's saying if it lacks virtue.

Then in the final chapter he asks again what makes a good life. And basically says that you can experience happiness throughout life and different forms- short-term or long-term; but at the end of it all, we all die. So what he is trying to say I think is that what is more important than happiness is whether or not you can die and feel as though you've lived a good life- of meaning, and a virtuous one. What's the life that you could be satisfied with. And did you have a sense of well-being. And even says it's not necessarily important whether you're actually satisfied with it as a whole, but rather if in hindsight you can see reason to have been satisfied with- basically you see and appreciate the meaning within it. And then basically says you didn't even have to necessarily have a life of well-being or necessarily feel it was a happy one; but rather, just perceive it as a life that was worth living- that you don't wish that you wouldn't have lived it. And then goes back to virtue and morals again, specifying that in life they are the most important aspect to get right. I think he is trying to get at the fact that if you have done the right things in life, and been a good person; then it's pretty hard to look back at your life and not have seen that it was worth living, or as a life that lacked meaning. 

He then says that a good life is one within our own control, indicating that we have control of our morality, what we place value on, and are pursuits of happiness and well-being, and the meaning that we place on those things basically.

Then he asks what our priority should be and ultimately it says there's no right or wrong answer but he offers some suggestions which are: connect with people and things that matter, relax (in essence to not forget to appreciate those things that matter,) avoid debt (as he terms as "unfreedom,") and his final bit of advice is to make it come out even (advice that he learned as a result of his great-grandmother teaching it to his father, who taught it to him.) He describes life in the form of a favorable balance sheet, with the side being equal. This analogy appealed to me, being an accounting major, naturally. He describes the idea of making it come out even in terms of karma or moral balance- did you do more giving than taking, can you justify the reasons for the things you did and the way you lived, great people fairly and respectfully, did you act with honesty and integrity, etc. Basically was there more good than bad. He says that we all have regrets and make mistakes, but did we at some point in our lives make up for those mistakes. And he ends the book with another accounting reference, by saying that if we are able to make amends for the parts that we did wrong, then "in the end, our balance sheets are in the black." Being an accounting major I understand this final quote; as in accounting, if your number is in the negative, it shows up as red rather than black.