Questioning Contemporary Universalist Approaches to Human Flourishing

Abstract

This article takes stock of the growing interest in flourishing measurement. The focus is on three challenges in this domain: the degree of coherent theorizing, the overreliance on psychometric validation, and the questionable universality of the measures. A rigorous process identified the eight most widely documented flourishing measures. All eight measures struggled with the three challenges. First, all measures were constructed on intuitive grounds, whether those bases were existing literatures, personal conceptualizations, or the intuition of an opposition of mental illness and flourishing. Second, all measures were assessed almost exclusively with psychometric studies, with little evidence of theoretical or cultural validity. Finally, all eight measures implicitly or explicitly assume cultural universality without providing theoretical argument or empirical evidence for that assumption. This stock-taking resulted in two main conclusions. First, there are areas of both consensus (e.g., that flourishing is a measurable, multidimensional construct) and dissensus (e.g., the components of flourishing) that can provide bases for future theory and research. Second, systematic theoretical argument is necessary to better understand what flourishing is, how it can be validly measured, and the degree to which it can be considered a universal human experience. It is time to address these theoretical and cultural questions.