Is a well-lived life worth anything?

I don't disagree with this gentleman's sentiments about the chasm between "our economy produces and what you might call a meaningfully well-lived life."

But I do not buy into his appeal to ancient Greek intellectual culture nor to his take-away that members of society today are..."the inheritors of a tradition not just older — but more humanistic, constructive, nuanced, dynamic, and perhaps just a little bit wiser — than we know."

Looking back on Greek history, we are subject to survivor bias that amplifies the culture's intellectual contributions. It is always difficult to ascertain the nuances of everyday life, consumption habits, etc. The types of people who would have written down this information were neither literate nor able to write, and those with the requisite resources were largely concerned with more interesting and valuable uses of their time. We have come a long way as a society with literacy rates etc. which democratize both access to knowledge and freedom of expression. Each generation has iteratively improved on these cultural building blocks. So, to say that we inherit traditions from a more nuanced, dynamic, humanistic time is provably wrong.

Democratizing knowledge leads to the formation of nuanced, dynamic, humanistic traditions. Just because the many outlets of human expression and creativity seem banal to us currently, doesn't make make them any less dynamic or humanistic than past traditions. We live in a time of unprecedented cultural growth.

Is this growth for the benefit of humanity?

No one has any idea, but with all things our cultural values and traditions will evolve in response to changing technology. We have a responsibility to future generations to constantly evaluate the tools we have and constantly revise them and envision new ones.

P.S. If this is unclear or someone has suggestions where I can refine a point, I would appreciate the input.

"The pursuit of eudaimonia most definitely can't amount to much in economies where those who trade accomplishment and raid societies earn thousands, millions, or billions of times as much as the creators and the builders of those societies..."

IIRC, Socrates was an artisan, not a wealthy man at all, though the rich youth such as Alcibiades did greatly admire him. Aristotle is said to have tutored Alexander the Great--anybody care to estimate relative wealth? And when Alcibiades and Alexander went raiding, it did not involve stocks and leveraged buyouts.

For that matter, what was Adam Smith's net worth next to that of Clive or Hastings or Pitt?