This paper examines two suggestions made by Susan Wolf and Thaddeus Metz to capture what distinguishes a meaningful life from a life in well-being and a moral life, and it advances these suggestions further. Whereas both accounts only use one criterion to develop this distinction kinds of goods or kinds of motivating reasons , I will argue that we eventually need both for a satisfying demarcation between a meaningful life on the one hand, and a life in well-being as well as a moral life on the other. According to my own account, a meaningful life is generated by activities which are suitable to respect anything of value if, first, these activities are pursued independently from any prospects of hedonic well-being they may promise, and, second, if these activities are motivated by reasons directed towards a final value of their object. Both elements of my proposal justify the distinctiveness of the value dimension of a meaningful life as one way to estimate whether a given life is or has been a good one: The distinct value of motivating reasons that become effective in ones meaning-generating activities is the reason why these activities possess a value regardless of the success of the agents efforts the value of meaningfulness. Such motivating reasons play no role when we assess the moral worth of a life, at least if this worth is measured according to the fulfillment of moral obligations. Likewise, they have no role in a life of hedonic well-being, because what is crucial there is what is achieved, while mere effort cannot be positively credited to the agents well-being.