Abstract
Aristotle and Xunzi provide an instructive comparative case study that illustrates why any canonical list of thinkers or texts that takes on an exclusive status is illegitimate, insofar as it excludes from consideration philosophical sources with the potential to broaden our understanding of vital issues. Aristotle and Xunzi present intriguingly different conceptions of the good life. Both see the good life as fulfilling what is distinctive of human life, as attainable only through experience and habituation, and as realizing not merely ethical but aesthetic ideals. Juxtaposing the two highlights the intellectualist, individualist, and realist tendencies in Aristotle’s conception in contrast to the social, cultural, and practical tendencies in Xunzi’s. By moving beyond any narrow canon to consider both approaches, we gain a richer range of resources by which to understand human life.