Examine the key features of Virtue Ethics
![Authors Avatar]()
by
emmerzpianogmailcom (student)
Examine the key features of Virtue Ethics (18)
Evaluate the extent to which the selected theory can withstand criticism (12)
Virtue Ethics is an ethical method that rejects the deontological ethics of Kant, the consequentialism of Utilitarianism and religious ethics as some ethicists were worried by an apparent lack of love, care and compassion in both of these moralities. ‘Virtue’ comes from the Greek word, arête, which means excellence, and centers on the character of the person making the moral decision rather than the action itself. Instead of focusing on the act, like deontology, it is agent-centered. ‘We are not concerned to know what goodness is but how to become good people, since otherwise our enquiry would be useless.’ Those such as Aristotle suggest that the ‘ethics of dilemma’ approach to morality forgets an essential part of ethics.
A key feature of Virtue Ethics is eudaemonia, which Aristotle argued should be the superior aim of human life. Eudaemonia is achieved when we become virtuous and Aristotle argued that this is a process that we grow towards by practicing virtues. However, Aristotle noted that ‘happiness’ could be subjective, consequently leading him to define three types of pleasure. The three types of pleasure are, pleasure seekers, seekers of honour and those who love contemplation. We slowly develop into good people by practicing such virtues, however absolute rules are not required. Instead, a good person will behave in the right way simply because it is right. Aristotle believed that the pleasures seekers find the lowest forms of happiness; he wrote ‘the utter servility of the masses comes out in their preference for a bovine [animalistic existence.]’ This is a similar view to John Stuart Mill, who defined higher forms of pleasure and lower forms in utilitarianism. Mill labelled intellectual activities as high forms, and behaviors such as gluttony as low forms. Aristotle believed that these high virtues are what separate us from animals, as the difference between humans and animals is the human ability to reason. People are able to understand their human nature and recognise tensions between emotions and reason through practical wisdom, phronesis. Phronesis is therefore the exercising of a mature wills which enables a person to act with wisdom and discernment. According to Aristotle, this ability originated from the soul and the soul was divided into two parts, rational and irrational. Reason is the executive, deciding when to act upon emotions through a balanced appetite. There are three fragments of the soul, the calculative, the desiderative and the vegetative and if the soul uses all these parts well and properly, then it is truly functional. This is very important because only a soul that functions correctly can find eudemonia.
Another key feature of Virtue Ethics is the doctrine of the golden mean, which does not entail a denial of emotions but investigates to what extent reason permits the expression of emotions. Aristotle developed Plato’s tripartheid teaching of the soul by attributing virtues to each feature, reason, emotions and appetite. The golden mean is the perfect balance between excess and deficiency, and there must be an awareness of the circumstances in which we act, otherwise known as prudence. Aristotle (as well as Plato and the Stoics) also put forward four main virtues, the cardinal virtues. Temperance, justice, courage ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
Another key feature of Virtue Ethics is the doctrine of the golden mean, which does not entail a denial of emotions but investigates to what extent reason permits the expression of emotions. Aristotle developed Plato’s tripartheid teaching of the soul by attributing virtues to each feature, reason, emotions and appetite. The golden mean is the perfect balance between excess and deficiency, and there must be an awareness of the circumstances in which we act, otherwise known as prudence. Aristotle (as well as Plato and the Stoics) also put forward four main virtues, the cardinal virtues. Temperance, justice, courage and wisdom are supposed to help us achieve the Final Cause.
Virtue Ethics was revised in the late 20th century by some leading ethicists, such as Elizabeth Anscombe, Alasdair Macintyre and Rosalind Hursthouse. Alasdair Macintyre was inspired by those such as Anscombe and tried to produce a version of the system after considering the history of Virtue Ethics, which can work in the modern age. Macintyre observed that ancient societies developed a series of virtues agreed by their inhabitants and the high point of this was the Athenian Virtues of Aristotle. The four versions of the Athenian virtues were Sophist, Platonic, Tragedian and Aristotelian. However, following the Enlightenment such virtues became displaced and rational philosophers ignored individual practice. A moral vacuum occurred where we were left with three archetypal characters, the bureaucratic manager, the rich aesthete, and the therapist. Macintyre argued that having a set of agreed virtues for our society could help to give life purpose and meaning. He suggested seven virtues, which are courage, temperance, wisdom, industriousness, hope and patience. Macintyre also used the idea of internal and external. An internal good is specific to the activity itself, for example, giving money to charity results in helping others and developing a sense of satisfaction. An external good is a good that is not specific to the act. For example, when giving to charity, your example may inspire others to do the same.
Evaluate the extent to which the selected theory can withstand criticism (12)
The theory can withstand criticism to a large extent, however there are some weaknesses in Virtue ethics that require addressing. Unlike Kantian deontology and Natural Law, virtue ethics does not give clear rules on how to act in particular situations. Robert Louden has argued that virtue ethics cannot resolve moral dilemmas. He stated that as virtue ethics is focused on the individual, it neither resolves nor attempts to resolve big moral dilemmas. It may help make the moral agent virtuous but it does not give any answers relating to an ethical crisis. However, theories like deontology are too restrictive in situations and therefore underestimate the extent to which there could be calamitous consequences because they focus solely on the action of the agent. Unlike deontology and natural law, virtue ethics is teleological and therefore allows you to examine the consequences of an action, thus allowing the agent room for adjustment in ethically compromising circumstances. On the other hand, Pojman has suggested that the torturing of innocent people for fun is wrong under all circumstances and consequently any ethical system needs certain rules that cannot be broken. Nevertheless, an awareness of rules rather than restrictive instructions may prove more profitable in certain situations, as the particulars of a scenario may demand a more complex reaction that operates beyond the rules. This gives more freedom to the individual to choose how to act; the agent is in complete control of his or her own morality.
Virtue ethics has also been criticised for placing too much emphasis on reason and forcing us to suppress our emotions, as Hume viewed emotions as being fundamentally important to a human being. However Martha Nussbaum has argued that virtue ethics is compassionate and caring. By placing importance on human emotions and responsibilities, the theory allows us to consider the way that our decisions may impact on the feelings of others. However, Kant would disagree with this, as he believed that emotions were not a suitable foundation to make ethical decisions with, asserting they were illogical and irrational. But, virtue ethics stresses the importance of character – someone who helps the poor out of compassion is morally superior to someone who helps out of moral duty. To Aristotle, personal and social flourishing is the final rational goal, and reason tames and moralizes the desires and appetites of the irrational part of our soul. Modern philosophers have placed too much emphasis on action and reason without emphasising socially agreed virtues. Robert Solomon, a modern virtue ethicist stated that, ‘the very idea that the good person is one who acts according to the right principles…makes my blood run cold.’ As one of the benefits of virtue ethics is that it emphasises the importance of the person who is the object of most moral discourse.
To conclude, virtue ethics can withstand criticism to a large extent. While many may question the absence of systematized instructions, virtue ethics allows the agent to control their own morality, thus allowing them to grow as an individual. Aristotle connected emotions closely with judgment and belief, and held that they can be cultivated through moral education to be important components of a virtuous character. By placing emotions on a higher pedestal, emotions become intelligent parts of the moral personality, which can be cultivated through a process of moral education and produce moral agents who can experience emotions like fear and anger appropriately. Taking emotions out of an ethical theory reduces an individual to robotic qualities that are unrealistic and impracticable.
by
emmerzpianogmailcom (student)
