Are we at an age where the pursuit of a 'best human life' is becoming or has become socially and intellectually redundant?

No. It is becoming more important than ever before.

I was once known as @Whiteliondreams here. You helped me a lot in my beginnings here and in academia. The reason I ask this question is because it seems there is a silent chaos slowly brewing. It is seen, heard, and felt everywhere we go: civil wars, social strife, migrations, political and social dismay.

It is not to say these never existed before, or at a level less than what it is today, but we should, sadly and assumedly, think that humans would be at a more transcendent state today than, say, 100 years ago. Unfortunately, the words, thoughts, and desires of our founding fathers (regardless of their social institutions and mores at the time) are going unheard and ignored.

Philosophy and axiolology (not even so much ethics); but the study of value theory itself is not only going unchallenged, but is splitting what was once known as a “Great Nation”. It appalls me because all I want for myself, I don’t care how selfish it is, is a little peace. Maybe I’m simple-minded or ideological, but man, is our Age the measure and testament of human intellect?

The fact that people even talk about the Axial Age is promising.
Karen Armstrong suggests we might be on the verge of a new Axial Age, given the current levels of chaos and violence. That’s a nice bit of optimism.

Here is how I see it-
1. Nothing wrong with trying, but you probably won’t change the world in your lifetime
2. You can’t escape from the world in any constructive fashion
3. So you can only play your game the best you can
Corollary to 3. It is good to know how to defend yourself

What is a “best human life”? I see your definition above, but I see that as applicable only to the small number of people who choose to think at those levels.

I think that the vast majority of people – in the US and around the world – are in such poverty that intellectual questions such as this are irrelevant. They’re trying to find food for tomorrow; they don’t have the luxury of deciding whether they are reaching their personal potential.

As to your comment on the humanities becoming redundant and irrelevant. I quibble with you – humanities are not redundant whatsoever; in fact they do bring (often) a less technocratic and more wholesome view of life than does technocracy.

However, sadly, the humanities have also become increasing irrelevant – largely due to economics, again. Humanities education very seldom leads to income; the vast majority of artists (authors, sculptors, musicians, composers, essayists, etc.) can barely eke out a living. (The expression ‘starving artist’ comes to mind).

In the world in which we live, the humanities writ large is a luxury as well.

A lot of what you mention is, I think, perspective. I am sure that at each faltering step we as a species have taken there are those who believe it will be our last.

For a somewhat cynical answer to your question, consider the philosophy of Nietzsche In such a world, there is no place for the striving behind humanism.

Some have said that the the characters in the television show Seinfeld were the embodiment of Nietzsche’s last man. Can you imagine any of them with an interest in the humanities? But of course the show was a satire. It derived its humor by poking fun at the characters’ shallowness and self-absorption.

I would like to believe that Nietzsche had it wrong, that humanism is being replaced by a more scientific perspective.

The human race has been developing since the species dragged knuckles.
Humans are innovative, but innovative hints at, no, smacks of technology. It is simply our form of metamorphosis to stretch primarily in one direction at a time. We started with basic survival skills; finding food, learning to follow food and seasons, clothing ourselves against weather and abrasions, adapting a taste for healing herbs and roots, and the like.
We then went into a community growth spurt; communication, cooperation, anticipating the needs of others rather than simply reacting.
Scientific innovation set in, and by then we populated the planet well enough to move into scientific innovation with some real force. Numbers, counting, keeping information stored for future use. Tools took on some real meaning. Societal rules became more than just convenience, they were necessary. Curiosity caused us to branch out. We invented new areas of pursuit for ourselves.
We are at a point now where population is an impairment. Increasing our numbers was crucial for survival of the race. A number of times we faced extinction. Not so nowadays. Our scientific thinking improved our tools, routines, communications, healing, travel, and so much more.
Excessive population numbers will cause skirmish, that is inevitable. Look though, at the directions technology has been taking recently. Humans have become alarmed at our own abuses of our resources, and realization has become a strong force towards directing our attentions and energies to what can be done to fix what we and our ancestors have caused to diminish.
Persons of various nations are working together to find solutions to hunger, fuels and the need for wiser use of resources, preserving the plants and animals mandatory for the survival of balanced environments.
We are entering a new era of advancement. It will not peak right away. Evolution takes time.

There’s a Buddhist scheme that I find relevant in thinking about this. It represents 6 possible modes, or “realms” of existence. Some of these are “hellish” realms, dominated by suffering; some are “heavenly’ realms of relatively little suffering; and then there’s the Human realm, which is somewhere in between. These “realms” are metaphorical and have to do with how life is experienced. One can be Homo sapiens and yet not inhabit the Human realm, just as one can find oneself in different realms from one day to the next.

In this scheme, it’s the Human realm that affords the best shot at freedom from suffering, and here’s why:

To someone living a hellish existence, the suffering is so overwhelming that all of one’s resources are exhausted in simply getting by, There isn’t any space for contemplation. To someone in the relative comfort of the “heavenly” realms, there’s little to no motivation to do the contemplative work necessary to cut the root of suffering, because the palliative effects of the easy life seem to offer an easier solution to the problem of suffering. But the Human realm has both enough suffering (anxiety, dissatisfaction, fear…) to drive serious inquiry and enough space to pursue that inquiry through contemplation.

It’s not hard to look around the world and see people trapped in hellish realms. And the heavenly realms are there, too. What characterizes our current age, as I see it, is the perception that the palliatives of the heavenly realm are the way to go. This is largely because of the unprecedented availability of commercial, technological, medical and chemical “fixes” for suffering, and their relentless promotion. To be in the Human realm nowadays is to look out for and aspire to the latest ways to deaden one’s suffering. We’d rather use the space afforded by the Human realm to decorate our prison cell nicely than do the actual work of getting out of the cell.

What is the big deal here? This what you do: It you feel that you aren’t living “The Best Human Life” then imagine what that is for you and what you must do to get there. I’ve spent the last half of my life pursuing this and, believe me, the journey has been difficult, instructional and has made me a much better person. It’s different for everybody, so why the discussion? Just do it. Talking about it is a diversion from the pursuit. In this case, discussion is for people who would rather bullshit than actually do anything.

It reminds me of a friend who has spent years talking about and planning the most detailed bike trips in exotic parts of the world, but never actually leaves his den. I finally figured him out. He simply enjoys the planning part. He never really intends to actually get out there, break a sweat, deal with people from foreign cultures and languages, and sleep under a tarp in the rain. He’s happy in his den with his dreams. A natural born academic. But he’ll never admit that.

Thank you everyone, your responses are very informative and broad.