Virtue Ethics Advantages and disadvantages.

CA stands for counterargument, so that the theory is explored with adequate complexity.

?

Virtue Ethics

Advantages

  • VE rejects sloganistic statement such as 'greatest happiness for the greatest number' Provide a false sense of easiness and pithiness; as there are complex caveats in utilitarianism and situation ethics etc , regardless of their 'mission statements. As Macintyre notes things like the hedonic calculus and the five working principles can be too complex and time consuming to go through on a daily basis, with VE a more realistic alternative.
  • Recognizes the inherent complexity in morality, rejecting absolutism and dogma.
  • Foot - although it cannot be a full guarantee of happiness, it allows firm and fertile grounds for it in developing a good character and allowing them to correct harmful passions and temptations. Most people instinctively turn to some form of a golden mean; it is even present in Buddhism in the idea of a middle way.
  • It appeals to religious and secular people - Anscombe, a great advocate and philosopher on VE, was herself a catholic - who would naturally thus follow natural law - and yet adapted the theory. Jesus himself is a role model for Christians by providing the ultimate example of a virtuous life.
  • The targets are not unrealistic as people naturally develop different virtues through experience and age. It is a simple system with the simple basis and end goal of universal well being for the community, achieved by a focus on self improvement. Despite being centered on individual growth, it is not hedonistic or selfish, as the achievement of eudamonia fulfills all society, not only benefiting the moral agent; but bringing   harmony, peace and  prosperity.
  • Allows agent to make decisions on their own moral well being, a virtuous person distinguished from one who blindly obeys the law.
  • Virtues can be cultivated and thus make people good - even other theories still place some importance on them e.g Nat Law's cardinal virtues.
  • Cares for others; comes from a place of true emotional investment as opposed to Kant's seeming callousness. Anscombe thought that cold, impersonal morality was like charity of the same type - not only did the person feel no benefit, being personally dehumanised - but it is self defeating as there is no room for kindness and other goods, which are needed almost transcendentally across theories - e.g cardinal virtues, 5 working principles.
  • Bad people may well perform good deeds, so the doctrine of the mean is a more realistic basis - as nat law backs up w int and ext goods.  (different to Aristotlean int and ext goods) E.g Corrupt, bureaucratic boss who gives his workers minimal rights; and yet is seen as a philanthropist because of company donations to large charities.
  • MacIntyre's developments recognize the vast array of human experience, though focused on time can also be applied to other modern cultures.This reduces the risk of 'othering' and thus belittling or damning cultures we have little understanding of, and to some extent may warn of unnecessary, colonialist interference in pre-established cultural morals.
  • Sees people therefore within their contexts and relationships. Criticism of deontological theories by Vardy - actions have replaced persons, behavior has been separated from people and doing is elevated above being.

Disadvantages

  • Doesn't answer specific dilemmas, where deontological theories e.g Nat law, Kant do. Louden says it is too self centred - it helps the moral agent develop themselves but is useless as real dilemmas could be argued either way e.g  abortion - courageous to give bith and then have it adopted, or courageous to defy law and stick up for the right to choice, and against amorality of ****, incest etc -  9 year old Nicaraguan girl.
  • Louden again criticises as it has no definitive list of intolerable and outright condemned acts such as murder and ****. CA  However, there is a reasonable argument that these are obvious to almost all moral agents, and if not, they are victims of psychopathy - stating the obvious comes to mind.
  • Difficult to decide who is truly virtuous, as acts may stem from immoral motives - invading a country to rid it of a wicked tyrant, also too conveniently allowing control for themselves, the classic the grandma and the girlfriend scenario  - helping a frail old lady across the road to impress a girl.
  • Aristotle was a product of his time; so for him slavery and rampant sexism were acceptable. Russell - 'an almost complete absence of benevolence.'' Vardy acknowledges keeping the virtues is easy when you live in ideal world. Adams calls this - priest and the ******* - with one more conducive to a moral life than the other. No points for guessing. CA. 1 - minor - Couldn't it also be said that if a ******* does achieve the virtues; he is more moral for overcoming his trappings? Eudamonia personal; not prescriptive - not everyone is asked to use the same ergon. CA 2 - major - MacIntryre acknowledges this; even weaving it into a positive of VE's adaptable nature.
  • May be argued as chauvinistic as his virtues were essentially masculine. CA - as gender boundaries are overcome in the modern world, virtues in themselves, not merely in terms of what is valued, becomes more adaptive. Though courage etc may sound masculine, that in itself is a misogynistic assumption - a traditionally feminine woman could show courage in making sacrifices for her children, but plenty of women can show it in more traditional ways too.
  • Judgement still has to be made on a 'virtue hierarchy' of which are the most desirable.
  • Even archetypes of virtue cannot be perfectly virtuous - e.g Nelson Mandela famously campaigned for the end of apartheid in South Africa; but advocated the use of violence. CA - VE requires no role models anyway, simply inherent desire for and contemplation of the virtues, Isn't it more reasonable to look up to flawed human beings than a force deemed as all perfect, God, Nature - Nat Law Not only does the latter oft clash with the problem of evil, but perfection in itself is an alien concept which cannot be fully understood as no one has ever seen or known it - the faith of Buddhism acknowledges this.
  • Virtues can become vices - showing courage in an oppressive war.
  • Unrealistic - no one can ever posses all 12 moral virtues, let alone in sync with the intellectual virtues, or absolve themselves from the inherently flawed state of being human.
  • Being as opposed to doing - selfish theory; doesn't concern itself with impact on others CA - kindness is a virtue.
  • Other factors to consider for ethical behaviour - Kant -doing one's duty - Util - happiness/utility principle - Nat Law - heaven/eternal life with God.

Evaluation

This as with all theories enters controversial ground. The main draw of the theory is its versatility and longevity - as shown by still having an impact despite being from Ancient Greece - and in Macintyre's developments. It has all the usual positives of relativism, in that it is not blindly legalistic, allows for variation, is somewhat instinctive and can be followed regardless of religious position. It is on the other hand criticized as a self centered, unrealistic product of its time; which could easily be manipulated and can be confusing in its lack of absolute code.

Comments

No comments have yet been made