Aristotle believed that virtue were found in the golden mean which involves finding the balance between two means and this is the best way to live in society, as extremes of character are unhelpful. Aristotle said that virtues are to be found between two vices each of which involves either an excess or a deficiency of the true virtue. Eg courage is the mean, between the tow vices coward and foolhardy. Aristotle said the mean is not the same for everyone and depends on circumstance and therefore you need to apply practical wisdom.
Some people would disagree with Aristotle’s golden mean; they say that virtue ethics seems to praise certain virtues that we may see as immoral such as soldiers fighting in an unjust war that may be courageous but does mean it is morally good. They would find that virtue ethics is not good when dealing with practical ethics.
Many people argue that virtue ethics is of use when dealing with practical ethics, one way of learning to be virtuous is to follow the example of virtuous people. Virtue ethics understands the need to distinguish good people from legalists, just because someone follow the laws does not make him a good person. The lives of Jesus, Nelson Mandela are good examples of moral excellence. However Susan Wolfe disagreed with this view and argued that moral saints are unattractive because they lack the ability to enjoy the enjoyable of life and are dull witted and boring. She suggests they are boring compared to Katherine Hepburn and Paul Newman.
Modern versions of virtue ethics argue that the assessment of a person’s character is an important aspect of our ethical though and needs to be included in any ethical theory. An example is G.E.M. Anscombe who published a paper called ‘Modern Moral Philosophy’ and put forward the idea that modern moral philosophy is misguided. She asks if there can be any moral laws if there is no God, but she suggests that the idea of eudaimonoia which does not depend on any God.
Anscombe also suggested that Kantian ethics and Utilitarianism do not depend on God, but they are still act based. Anscombe thought that act based ethics do not make sense because it ignores a belief that people no longer hold and therefore virtue ethics is better when dealing with practical ethics. Also according to the principle of autonomy it neglects the community aspect of morality. Also Anscombe might argue that Virtue ethics avoids formulas, like utilitarianism.
Philippa Foot attempted to modernise Aristotle’s virtue ethics and keeping it to the Aristotelian understanding of character and virtue. She recognised the importance of the persons own reasoning the importance of the persons own reasoning in the practice of virtue. Foot argues that a virtue does not operate as a virtue when turned to a bad end. Virtue ethics does not pretend to be able to tell us what a good person would do in every possible situation but encourages us to be more like such a person so that we will not need an ethical theory to make our decisions. It stresses the importance of character- eg someone who helps the poor out of compassion does seem to be morally superior to someone who does it out of duty. Virtues are good for us and also help us to correct harmful human passions and temptations. An example is, this guy whose neighbour is a footballer, and is nice to him for football tickets. She felt that virtue ethics is useful but needs to be modernised.
Alasdair MacIntyre claims in his book “after virtue” that ethical theories have simply resulted in ethical disagreements. He says that people do no think there are any moral truths and people’s attitudes are based on emotivism. MacIntyre concluded that the age of enlightenment gave rise to theories such as utilitarianism and Kantianism and that they had lost sight of the idea of morality as their true telos. MacIntyre thinks that morality should be seen in terms of human purpose but thought it was impossible to restore Aristotle theory of function and so he attempts to make human virtue depend on community. MacIntyre virtues are any virtues which sustain the households and communities in which men and women seek for good together. He therefore would argue that virtue ethic is of use when dealing with practical ethics and act based ethics is not.
However I believe that one major difficulty is identifying the virtue, are they all culturally relative? In addition Virtue ethics does not seem to have room for basic concepts such as rights and obligations, so as a theory of ethics it seems incapable of dealing with big issues, it does not always have a view about what makes an act right or wrong. Therefore I would argue virtue ethics is of little use when dealing with practical ethics.
Rosalind Hursthouse believes in Aristotelian framework for her virtue ethics, even though she does not agree with all of Aristotle’s conclusions. Hurthouse claims that virtues are virtues because they help a person achieve eudaimonia. She agreed with Julia Annas who sees the virtues as shaping the virtuous person’s practical reasoning in characteristic ways, and not simply as shaping the virtuous person’s practical reasoning in characteristic ways, and not simply as shaping that person’s attitudes or actions. For hurthouse being virtuous is the most reliable path to flourishing and seems to think that no other path is reliable. She also attempts to answer the criticism of virtue ethics that it provides no moral dilemmas but by showing how a virtuous person would think about a moral decision.
However Robert Louden raised the issue of ‘how can virtue ethics be applied to moral dilemmas?’ Virtue ethics does not help people facing a crisis because it does not give any clear rules for action. It is difficult to work out what is the virtue to something like stem cell research and abortion. It does not give concrete answers and says it is a matter of practical wisdom. He would agree that virtue ethics is of little use when dealing with practical ethics.
Michael Slote describes virtue ethics as being mostly based on our common sense ideas and intuitions about what counts as a virtue, and prefers to use the word “admirable” to describe an action, rather than “good” or excellent” which need qualifying and explaining. He sees the opposite as a deplorable action, which can mean both foolish and careless and morally blameworthy actions. He describes virtue as “inner trait or disposition of the individual’, so a virtue is a kind of balanced caring between those who are close to us, eg friends and family and people in general. His view seems to go against virtue ethics which sees it as good to be biased in favour of friends and family, unlike utilitarianism or Kant which sees it impartially as important. Slote’s view does seem to allow a wide range of actions by the person facing a moral dilemma, as a wide range of actions could be fitted into a life that showed balanced caring and does not seem to help very much when having to choose between a family member and strangers.
Slote’s discussion of virtue ethics is his explanation of the difference between agent-focused and agent- based theories. Agent focused theories understand the moral life in terms of what it is to be a virtuous person, where virtues are inner dispositions. Agent theories evaluate actions according to the inner life and motive of the people who do such actions. He says that there are many traits we find admirable such as kindness and compassion, and we can identify these by looking at people we admire.
Feminism virtue ethics developed by Annette Baier. The female virtues are: care, compassion, interdependence, community, cases. They claim that men often think morally in terms of justice and autonomy, which could be seen as ‘masculine’ traits, whereas women think morally in terms of caring, nurturing and self-sacrifice. Baier advocates a view of ethics that takes account of our natural biases and the importance of trust for people in lives. Carol Gilligan supported this view and said ethics is currently not about caring but should be and women are concerned with care.
In conclusion I believe Virtue ethics depends on some final end which gives shape to our live and there may not be one and being virtuous may not affect it anyway. We need guidelines as well as virtue ethics both together.
