Explain Aristotles Virtue Ethics and how this has been developed by later thinkers

MacIntyre is similar in one sense to Aristotle and the whole concept of Virtue theory that moral wisdom is of a large significance but differs in a sense as this gentleman focuses on not only good (virtuous) persons doing ‘right’ but also comments on how this also benefits society as a whole (Aristotle does touch upon this but implicitly; he is more focuses on individual persons) – something which he believes is ‘morally in decline due to ethics losing itself’. Virtuous persons turn into virtuous societies, something very important for the future prosper of mankind. For example, in previous societies (whereby much less ‘wrongness’ was undertaken) courage was a measure of the quality of an individual and is essential to sustain a household and community; Courageous persons can be relied on and so are important in relationship, be it employee-employer or otherwise; Fidelity ensures persons are supportive and helpful. Thus persons who display these virtuous are good persons, making the most of their human lives, but this in turn makes society good.

Foot also writes about how human beings do not get on well without virtues, thus in support on which MacIntyre touches upon about how it is not only important for the self to become virtuous, but also important for humanity as a whole. Foot draws upon examples from Russia under Stalinist terror, whereby unethical actions were inevitable. Within being a virtuous person, foot links virtues to being as important as being physically strong and healthy. Strength and health are excellences of the body; virtues are excellences of the will. One needs both in order to be truly excellent. Foot also highlights that these virtuous persons are not just virtuous for then doing right things, but also because they can fight away temptation, which leads to ultimate human development. Foot illustrates that persons who are tempted to steal when the opportunity presents itself (and do not) is still virtuous, but not as virtuous and as developed as persons whom have the opportunity (and do not steal) where the temptation and need is much stronger, for example persons whom have a starving family. Of course this example brings up entirely different ethics within itself, but to Foot, whilst stealing would make them ‘happy’ it does nothing for their human development.

In conclusion, we can see that Virtue theory is much different to other areas of ethics; it does not focus on defining principles by which we should act (good persons are defined and what makes them good); it does not believe that good behaviour comes before right character (it is the opposite); it does not focus upon actions and (most loving) consequences (what is important is the character of moral persons). The theory’s stance is upon human development which was later adapted to include society’s development and more specific virtues.