With this in mind, Aquinas offers several reasons for thinking that happiness does not consist in being famous. First, true happiness is incompatible with immorality and a vicious character, but of course these are found in some people who have achieved fame. Second, he thinks that the truly happy person lacks nothing of lasting significance, but the famous person can lack such things. Third, Aquinas thinks of happiness as "the perfect good," which entails that no evil can come from it. And yet evil can come from fame, as the famous person can choose to spend the currency of celebrity in morally regrettable ways. For these reasons, fame and happiness are not the same thing.

There is more to say about these claims, but I think that Aquinas is onto something. I've thought about this a bit, and I don't want to be famous (not that there's much chance of this!), and I certainly wouldn't wish fame on my kids. As my friend and philosopher Jim Spiegel puts it, "the American celebrity machine...is like a soul-eating monster." If this is right, and I think that in many ways it is, then it is remarkable that so many people are willing to offer themselves and their children up for consumption.

As one of the songs on former Idol contestant Chris Daughtry's debut CD puts it, "Be careful what you wish for, 'cause you just might get all...and then some you don't want."

Follow me on Twitter, and check out my personal blog.