A brief synopsis of Wolf’s view:
Wolf is a critic of the moral pint of view and is instead after a conception of morality advocated by a point of view of individual perfection.
Moral saints do not serve as morally compelling ideals. To be a moral saint is neither good, desirable, nor rational.
The moral saint would possess the virtues to an excessive degree. –Wouldn’t make negative evaluations of others. Wouldn’t favor people for traits they have.
The moral saint would be “too good for his own good.” He would have to ignore or “crowd out” the non-moral virtues” as well as the characteristics of a person that make him “well-rounded and richly developed in character.” The moral saint, according to Wolf, will not “read novels or play tennis” – his life will be “strangely barren.”
The moral saint couldn’t enjoy comedy, couldn’t develop skills in gourmet cooking. There are things he could do to use his time better.
There is a LIMIT TO HOW MUCH MORALITY WE CAN STAND. “When the moral saint drops his fishing trip or other personal enjoyment for others, we don’t wonder how much he loves morality, but how much he does not love these other things.” The moral saint is incapable of experiencing the kind of joy that comes from developing non-moral traits.
The real utilitarian would not embrace moral sainthood as an ideal. To be a moral saint would produce more unhappiness in the long run if everyone cultivated the traits of the saint.
The Kantian rational saint can’t exist. For Kant, there are duties of self-mastery and apathy that exist such that we must ensure that our PASSIONS are not so strong that they interfere with our ability to deliberate.