Last updated: October 29, 2025
A healthy person has a stable relationship between their life goals and progress towards them, leading to optimal subjective well-being. Changes in their circumstances may disrupt this stability. Homeostatic mechanisms will guide adaptation to re-establish a stable relationship, as it was originally, if the change is minor or with adjustments if the change is significant. This page considers what life goals are.
Life goals, also known as superordinate or long-term goals, are associated with a person’s purpose in life, which gives meaning to the person’s life. People rarely articulate their global goals explicitly, and considering and discussing them is emotionally challenging. They are, in many respects, the person’s core attributes. They are undoubtedly powerful; some people will die for their purpose, for example, a person who dies rather than go against their religious or moral position. Most people are more flexible and have several significant aims in their lives, so they may need to balance the effort they put into each; conversely, if one becomes impossible, they can transfer their effort to another. This page discusses the nature of life goals and reviews the evidence.
Table of Contents
Introduction
People are motivated by goals; without goals, most become apathetic and have lower well-being. Short and medium-term goals are usually practical and easily defined. They include, for example, getting dressed in the morning for work and going on holiday with family in July, many months ahead. However, as many people discover when retiring or losing their job, the absence of any long-term purpose in life can lead to low mood and worse well-being.
People generally require a sense of purpose to give their lives meaning, and work often provides it. The instillation of purpose by work or taking responsibility for the home and family is usually considered a part of life; its crucial role in giving life meaning is not consciously recognised.
Researchers and philosophers have long understood the importance of purpose and goals in motivating people. Abraham Maslow was one, and he suggested that overarching goals could be categorised into five categories. Rehabilitation researchers have also recognised the role of life goals in achieving better patient outcomes. This page reviews life goals, their nature, roles, and use in rehabilitation.
Life goals and philosophy.
Humans look for meaning in everything, usually finding some meaning. The question, What is the meaning of life, has been discussed since people could think and communicate. Although some of the discussion considers why humankind exists, most concerns the meaning for the individual. What gives my life meaning? This is a perennial question.
Philosophers have investigated the question, and Thaddeus Metz has provided an overview. First, the meaning of life, as applied to humanity, is distinguished from the meaning a person holds about their life. This page only considers the latter.
He then presents two supernatural factors that may give meaning. God-centred views hold that God has assigned the person a purpose, chosen by God, and, for the person, satisfying God’s purpose gives meaning to their life. Generally, these ideas do not equate achieving God’s purpose with gaining a reward such as eternal life.
Soul-centred ideas emphasise that each person has an immortal, personal soul. In this context, life achievements are thought to determine the nature of the afterlife. One example is that God chooses the nature of the afterlife and may do so by judging how well his purposes have been fulfilled. Soul-centred purposes do not require God; they generally assume that a better life leads to a better afterlife.
The naturalist approaches fall into two classes.
- The Subjective approach holds that the person alone determines what gives their life meaning and judges how well they have met those goals.
- The Objective approach asserts that subjective judgment needs additional backing and that certain goals in three specific areas are fundamentally superior. The three suggested areas of concern are:
- Morality: goals that lead to morally good outcomes,
- Enquiry: goals that seek after the truth, and
- Creativity: goals that lead to beauty.
These two approaches are compatible with a belief in God or the existence of a soul.
A third naturalist approach considers that belief in supernatural factors demeans the strength of naturalist approaches.
The last philosophical stance is nihilism – the belief that life has no inherent meaning, either in general or for an individual. While this can be seen as a reasonable academic perspective, it ignores humans’ universal desire to find purpose in life. A true nihilist’s sense of meaning might stem from a passion to persuade others of their viewpoint.
From a clinical perspective, the naturalist approach is most relevant. It is neutral about a person’s supernatural beliefs, recognises their role in determining meaning in life, and suggests three likely areas for clinical use and research. In particular, the three areas outlined in the objective approach map align well with aspects of self-actualisation in Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.
Purpose in life.
Patrick Knight and Todd Kashdan defined purpose well in their paper, “Purpose in Life as a System That Creates and Sustains Health and Well-Being: An Integrative, Testable Theory.” They stated that purpose:
- Is a central and self-organising life aim,
- Stimulates goals and alters behaviour,
- Gives life meaning.
They compare purpose to a compass, giving life a sense of direction; following the direction is optional, but fulfilling purpose is associated with greater subjective well-being. They consider that purpose has three components:
- Scope, the extent to which it influences all activities or only a proportion,
- Strength, which determines the power of its influence on activities in different situations,
- Awareness, which reflects how well a person can articulate their purpose.
They suggest five elements, with each having a testable hypothesis. They are that purpose:
- Is associated with behavioural consistency. People whose purpose has a broad scope will act similarly and with similar intentions throughout their lives.
- Creates psychological flexibility, enabling the person to work around obstacles in their life.
- Increases efficiency in the person’s use of personal resources, so they are less prone to illness and respond to stress better.
- Is associated with greater satisfaction with life and subjective well-being.
- Is related to greater cognitive control, with the person acknowledging their purpose.
Much evidence shows that living a purposeful life is associated with better health. Aliya Alimujiang and colleagues analysed data from 6985 people aged 50 years or more, investigating the association between the initially measured purposefulness and health 15 or more years later. They found that higher levels of purpose in life were associated with lower all-cause mortality. Randy Cohen and colleagues found the same in a meta-analysis of 10 prospective studies involving 136,256 people.
In a detailed discussion of Purposefulness as a critical factor in functioning, disability and health, Joshua Lee and colleagues suggest that purposefulness links a person with their narrative identity and experiences. They suggest that an active focus on the purpose in someone’s life, often increasing their awareness and helping them articulate it, may support the rehabilitation process.
Maslow’s needs.
I have considered these in detail in a blog post. In summary, he suggested five areas of need:
- Physiological, which he termed basic, concerns persistent thirst, hunger, sexual lust, and similar primal needs driving behaviours.
- Safety concerns include having a place to live and sleep, and sufficient resources to avoid significant risk from external events.
- Affiliation, which he describes as love, refers to emotionally close relationships with one or a few other people, such as family.
- Esteem is another word for status as perceived by others and the person.
- Self-actualisation, which can be subdivided into three types:
- Cognitive: acquiring and using knowledge
- Moral: doing activities that are good
- Social: benefiting others or society.
This is a way of categorising needs; they are not specific needs attributable to any individual. The categorisation has evidence supporting its validity, not least its continued use and prominence over 80 years. The self-actualisation goals are also congruent with the objective naturalist goals mentioned above.
Maslow’s categorisation of needs extends well beyond the life goals developed on this page. Most life goals can be categorised as self-actualisation. However, life goals as typically conceived often overlook essential areas, such as having a safe place to live and close friends.
Therefore, in clinical practice, one may always need to consider high-level, long-term goals outside the concept of meaningful goals. Certainly, when considering long-term rehabilitation goals, issues related to a safe environment are often highly relevant.
Life goals.
Life goals are concomitant with purpose; having a purpose implies a goal. Many terms are used for the same construct, such as meaningful goals, overarching or long-term goals, fundamental goals, and self-actualisation. The essential features are that they are:
- at the peak of the hierarchy of goals,
- long-term,
- Usually related to abstract ideas and not specific, concrete matters,
- Integral to the person, influencing all their activities, albeit subtly.
Twenty years ago, Sivaraman Nair wrote Life Goals: the concept and its relevance to rehabilitation; this paper examined what life goals are, how they can be established, and how they fit into the rehabilitation process.
In 2017, a student, Neeltje Vermund, and her colleagues undertook a qualitative study of general practitioners (family doctors) and senior hospital specialists in geriatrics, asking about goals for people with multiple diseases. Their data suggested goals fell into three groups that formed a hierarchy: those concerned with specific symptoms or impairments, functional goals, and fundamental goals. Fundamental goals “specify patient’s priorities in life, related to their values and core relationships.”
This and much other work show that rehabilitation goals should form a hierarchy, with lower-level, shorter-term goals linked to a person’s high-level goals; without a link, the person will not be committed to achieving the lower-level goals.
Following this, in 2020, Joost Dekker and his colleagues wrote a paper, Setting meaningful goals in rehabilitation: rationale and a practical tool. Their work was based on an excellent, monumental review of the literature on finding meaning in life by Crystal Park, along with some qualitative studies on patients who had experienced a stroke.
Joost Dekker et al. felt that fundamental goals had five aspects, interlinked but distinguishable:
- Core values: what is right and wrong
- Relationships with others, which may include animals,
- Worldview on life and death, and suffering,
- Identity: about one’s life and narrative,
- Inner-posture: enduring what cannot be changed.
Establishing life goals - research
Joost Dekker and colleagues developed a tool and method for establishing meaningful goals (life goals). They created a three-stage process. First, in a facilitated conversation with the person, one explores their global meaning. The five aspects of life goals are remembered and can be referred to to encourage thought and reflection. This is used to develop a meaningful overall rehabilitation goal. The third and final step is to set or adjust specific goals to align with the overall goal.
The process has been utilised, and Elsbeth Littooij and colleagues have evaluated the experiences of patients and staff. The process was emotionally demanding for some patients; clinicians did not report their emotional strain, but I suspect some clinicians found the discussion challenged them to reflect on their broader sense of purpose. Most people reported finding it helpful, and it was linked to increased satisfaction.
This process can only be applied to a tiny proportion of patients, typically those in an inpatient setting with especially complex cases likely to persist. It requires significant resources, relies on well-maintained cognitive abilities, and is suitable only for patients willing to engage in the process. Nonetheless, the research and method highlight the nature of life goals, and a less structured approach may achieve the same outcome.
Establishing life goals - clinically
We need a much simpler way to establish life goals. Asking someone directly would be quick but unlikely to work without some preparation.
If a person’s rehabilitation episode is likely to be brief, focused on a straightforward issue, such as replacing a piece of equipment, and is not part of a long-term management plan, then one may not consider life goals. Nevertheless, during the appointment, one may ask about the future, which will allow the patient to discuss their concerns, if any. A question such as: What are you hoping, or were you expecting, this intervention to help you with, or do? The answer may reveal significant other issues indicating the person needs more help.
For all other patients, the patient and family could be given a short document outlining the concept of life goals, providing examples such as Maslow’s five categories and the five aspects proposed by Joost Dekker et al. (shown above), and asking them to consider what makes their life meaningful. The document should explain why this helps in rehabilitation and how they will be asked.
Spontaneous conversations with rehabilitation team members offer an excellent opportunity to explore what motivates someone in a less threatening way. All staff should be alert to this, and if a conversation reveals a person’s deeper and long-term interests, they must document and share their findings. These conversations are best started by someone the person is familiar with, and broached during an activity so that it is a typical conversation, not an in-depth psychological assessment.
One specific method in the conversation is to ask someone about their hopes. I have written a post for non-professionals that discusses hope and life goals, titled “Goals and hope in rehabilitation.” I have also talked about how rehabilitation professionals tend to avoid discussing hope, and that hope in rehabilitation can be an overlooked asset. I suggest that a person’s hope reflects the rehabilitation process: it expresses a valued outcome and plans how to achieve it.
Once the patient has started discussing life goals, a more deliberate exploration can be undertaken, but this should be done only when the goals are uncertain or only sketchy. Maslow’s five domains of motivation help suggest matters to consider.
In summary, the most practical approaches are to:
- Provide a short document introducing the topic of “What is important to you?” which will enable anyone to start a discussion with a team member if they wish.
- Engage a patient in general conversation about their interests, being alert to anything discussed that indicates their life goals,
- Purposefully ask a patient about their hopes related to rehabilitation and their long-term outcome.
Life goals – synthesis.
This brief overview of an enormous and complex field of research demonstrates that rehabilitation ignores life goals at its peril. Many considerations will influence how much time and effort is devoted to life goals with individual patients. Still, in complex and challenging situations, some resources must be dedicated to the topic.
Purpose, meaning, and life goals are all vital parts of anyone’s life. Their importance is maintained when the person is ill and adapting to their new situation. Therefore, life goals must be an essential feature of any rehabilitation theory. How they are incorporated into the service’s multiprofessional teamwork will vary greatly. Still, they must be discussed by the team and not ignored, for example, when developing service policies. Their use with a person must be proportional to the situation’s complexity.
The two frameworks most likely to help are Maslow’s five domains of need and the five aspects of life goals suggested by Joost Dekker and colleagues. Clinically, it is much easier to consider Maslow’s five areas of need for each patient, as this approach can be brief and serve as an aide-memoire. The MindMap below summarises the topic considered.
Conclusion
High-level needs, motivating needs, or life goals are the third foundation stone of the theory of rehabilitation. Many words are used to describe them, with life goals being one. They are closely related to Maslow’s needs, which is a way to classify general goals that may influence all behaviours and decisions. Maslow’s needs have the clinical advantage of being less intrusive for patients and easier to use in practice. The top of his hierarchy is self-actualisation, closely related to fundamental beliefs or meaningful goals. The crucial message is that the clinician and clinical team must always consider life goals. The effort devoted to exploring and discussing life goals with the patient is determined by feasibility, need, and available resources. They must never be actively ignored; in challenging or complex cases, they should always be considered, but in other situations, it is a matter of discretion.