Everybody does philosophy because we lack data and we have no means of acquiring it (and/or no need). Calling yourself philosopher is like calling yourself breather. Surely true but pointless.

Fortunately technology advanced to the level that allowed us to gather some actual data and instead of just thinking blankly about the world we experience natural philosophers started to construct models of predictive utility. The rest is history ... of science. Other philosophers are still waiting for their technology refusing to think about something else till it arrives.

There's nothing wrong in philosophy but it's just recreation for the times you feel like thinking a bit but are too lazy to find something useful to think about.

> How do you collect data about what constitutes a good life?

You tempt me to think pointlessly for a while. It's really untimely because at the moment I should be thinking about stuff people need from me.

How can a philosopher find out meaning of "good" to give a question "what constitutes a good life?" enough meaning to even dream of arriving at an answer? I encourage you to listen to what Sam Harris has to say.