Virtue Ethics

Created by: A. Person
Created on: 01-05-14 00:28


	Virtue Ethics
	AdvantagesGetting Started Flexibility. The virtuous person has 'practical wisdom', which enables them to judge which action is correct in the given situation. A virtuous person experiences emotions 'at the right time, to the right degree, for the right motivation'. This can be contrasted with deontological theories, such as that of Kantian ethics, which doesn't take context into account. Character is taken into account - a person's overall character ultimately decides whether or not they are moral. For example someone who is extremely racist but still behaves 'morally' could not be considered virtuous, because their soul is imbalanced, signalling a life which is not 'good'.	Disadvantages Flourishing is not necessary for fulfilment. People are able to articulate their self-interest independently of morality - for example a man might feel fulfilled working as a drug dealer, thus refuting Socrate's analogy of the sound/leaking jars. This links to the view that human beings have no function. We can use Sartre's 'existence precedes essence' argument to show that there is no universal function, and consequently virtue is an empty, subjective concept. Robert Louden, a critic of ethics, pointed out that it does not provide a sufficiently rigid moral framework for moral dilemmas to be solvable. For example, what if a friend's wife asks you whether or not her husband has been having an affair, and you have promised to your friend not to tell his wife what you know? According to the doctrine of the mean, the virtuous person, through the use of practical wisdom, can see which response is the most 'moderate'. But it seems that neither action is any more virtuous than the other... So can virtue really aid us in situations like this? The second advantage can be viewed as a disadvantage... Aristotle held that only a person with all the virtues could perform a moral action. Actions in themselves are not moral. But this seems unfair, because what about 'moral heroes'? A man with seriously bigoted views might acknowledge that he is a bigot, and fight against his natural urge to hurt those he views as different. It seems then that he has actually recognised genuine moral worth in certain actions. This is arguably more moral than being moral because it is 'second nature'... Particularly when Aristotle admitted that upbringing influences whether or not a person can reach eudaimonia...
	Evaluation Ultimately, virtue ethics seems to suggest that morality and self-interest are unrelated... If people can achieve the kind of happiness which Aristotle equated with 'the good life' outside of the context of such a 'good life', it appears that morality does not flow from self-interest. Moreover it seems that virtue ethics fails to explain how to act - and as such, it can be concluded that it is overly concerned with character-development... ('ethics' is derived from 'ethos', the Greek word for 'character!')

Virtue Ethics

AdvantagesGetting Started

Flexibility. The virtuous person has 'practical wisdom', which enables them to judge which action is correct in the given situation. A virtuous person experiences emotions 'at the right time, to the right degree, for the right motivation'. This can be contrasted with deontological theories, such as that of Kantian ethics, which doesn't take context into account.
Character is taken into account - a person's overall character ultimately decides whether or not they are moral. For example someone who is extremely racist but still behaves 'morally' could not be considered virtuous, because their soul is imbalanced, signalling a life which is not 'good'.

Disadvantages

Flourishing is not necessary for fulfilment. People are able to articulate their self-interest independently of morality - for example a man might feel fulfilled working as a drug dealer, thus refuting Socrate's analogy of the sound/leaking jars. This links to the view that human beings have no function. We can use Sartre's 'existence precedes essence' argument to show that there is no universal function, and consequently virtue is an empty, subjective concept.
Robert Louden, a critic of ethics, pointed out that it does not provide a sufficiently rigid moral framework for moral dilemmas to be solvable. For example, what if a friend's wife asks you whether or not her husband has been having an affair, and you have promised to your friend not to tell his wife what you know? According to the doctrine of the mean, the virtuous person, through the use of practical wisdom, can see which response is the most 'moderate'. But it seems that neither action is any more virtuous than the other... So can virtue really aid us in situations like this?
The second advantage can be viewed as a disadvantage... Aristotle held that only a person with all the virtues could perform a moral action. Actions in themselves are not moral. But this seems unfair, because what about 'moral heroes'? A man with seriously bigoted views might acknowledge that he is a bigot, and fight against his natural urge to hurt those he views as different. It seems then that he has actually recognised genuine moral worth in certain actions. This is arguably more moral than being moral because it is 'second nature'... Particularly when Aristotle admitted that upbringing influences whether or not a person can reach eudaimonia...

Evaluation

Ultimately, virtue ethics seems to suggest that morality and self-interest are unrelated... If people can achieve the kind of happiness which Aristotle equated with 'the good life' outside of the context of such a 'good life', it appears that morality does not flow from self-interest. Moreover it seems that virtue ethics fails to explain how to act - and as such, it can be concluded that it is overly concerned with character-development... ('ethics' is derived from 'ethos', the Greek word for 'character!')

Get Revising

Virtue Ethics

Virtue Ethics

AdvantagesGetting Started

Disadvantages

Evaluation

Comments

Similar Philosophy resources: