People need to be open to discussing their own triumphs and failures, in a way that lowers the stakes when we feel envy. Furthermore, Sara highlights the growth mindset as a powerful heuristic for regulating one’s own envy. Sara emphasizes that the envier should focus on the object they lack rather than the person they envy, since focusing on the object will help encourage the envier to pursue a path of self-improvement. In the last segment of the show, Josh, Ken, and Sara discuss strategies for cultivating the right kind of envy. Sara synthesizes this discussion by describing the three-part relation of envy – of the envier, the person who is envied, and the object that the envier feels that they lack – and the distinct relations between these three components that can make envy good or bad. Ken then concludes from this that emulative envy arises from two conditions – first we must envy others and then negatively regard ourselves in order to feel impelled to change. Ken inquires about what distinguishes emulative envy from admiration, to which Sara responds that emulative envy tends to motivate us to change who we are, while admiration is a more passive act. Sara weighs in by clarifying four types of envy: emulative, inert, aggressive and spiteful envy – each with their own respective qualities. The hosts are joined by Sara Protasi, professor of philosophy at the University of Puget Sound. Josh pushes back, arguing that people always compare themselves to others and that, if anything, envy can serve as an impetus for self-improvement. Ken explains that envy is nothing more than a recipe for a miserable life of comparing yourself with others. Josh and Ken begin the show by considering these competing benefits. Is envy necessarily a vice? On the one hand, it can be viewed as an impetus for self-improvement, but on the other hand, it tends to cultivate bitterness towards those we envy.

Virtue and vice