I was discussing Harris’ ideas with a friend and I stumbled upon what seems to be a problem with the health analogy (i.e. the idea that physical health is analogous to moral health).
It starts with the presupposition that health is best defined as autonomy (and admittedly, if this definition breaks down, the problem breaks down). Autonomy is freedom/ability, is ethically neutral (as free will is, if you believe in that), and does not ethically represent the actions that are manifested by this autonomy/freedom/ability until it does (until there is an ethical action). Therefore, it is more appropriate to say that “good” physical health is analogous not with good moral action, but with the ability to perform good “moral” action… but this is still neutral ethically until an action is performed.
My concern and reason for posting this is not to say that physical and moral health do not have some desired value (they DO!), but to ask whether or not they are of such a different sort that Harris’ analogy commits a category error conflating the two.