Two kinds of eudaimonia

Just a quick update - I'm a eudaimonist now. And a damn statist to boot. My moral views are less Kantian than they have been in the past, and I now see "acting in accordance with our nature" as a big part of morality.

But what's "natural" for us? I agree with Mencius that the beginning of morality is the primordial compassionate urges you feel towards others. But as Steven Pinker mentions, it's more natural for us to sacrifice our self interest for family members than for a larger group - we have to socially train ourselves to include non-family into our circle.

I like the eudaimonia that's broader than merely the primordial. I generally see morality as a way to act that contributes to human enrichment, and a big part of that is an increase in human life expectancy and quality of life.

So the socialization that occurs to get people to include non-family into their circle, though not immediately natural, is "natural" enough for the purposes of my eudaimonism because it's necessary for states, which helps keep people from dying young.