Explain the theory of Virtue Ethics

AS and A Level Religious Studies & Philosophy

Natalie Jones Yr 12 RE

Virtue ethics is making moral decisions at its purest and simplest form. It does not rely on religion; society or culture it simply depends on the person themselves. Virtue ethics looks to a person’s morality, rather than the morality of the action. The sole focus of virtue ethics is the character and the morality of a person. Virtue ethics is a tradition that goes back to Plato and Aristotle; it is also known ass areatic ethics, from the Greek word arête, which means excellence or Virtue.

They believed the heart of morality is not in the actions or duties, but in the person performing the actions. Virtue ethics can look back to Aristotle for its guidelines. His idea of happiness. It is independent of all moral pre-conceptions and focuses on the individual. This means that when a person makes a decision it should not be judged on what there decision was, but concentrate on the intention of the person making the decision. It directly contrasts with other forms of ethics, which aim to show how to discover the right course of action. Kant and Bentham both wrote about defining virtue and encouraging these characteristics. However they only looked at the correct behaviour rather than focusing on a person character. This shows how the concept of virtue should be considered as completely separate from other ethical approaches.

Password

Confirm Password

I agree to the terms of service and privacy policy

This is a preview of the whole essay

The main component of virtue ethics is Aristotle’s assumption that everyone wants a full and happy life. This associates itself with eudaimonia, which is deserving to be happy. Eudaimonia means more than just happiness it is about being worthy of the joy that you as a person are receiving. For Aristotle Eudaimonia is the highest good because it is desired for its own sake, rather than ulterior motives. It is not about society been forced to have righteous motives, instead it is about society wanting to gain the highest level. According to Aristotle there are three types of happiness. The fist is happiness as a philosopher, which is basically freedom of the mind. The second is happiness as a free member of society, which is the contentment of being accepted into your society. The last of which is happiness as a life of enjoyment and pleasure this is simply the freedom of being you.

A virtue would be patience and its two vices would be apathy and impatience. The key to this is being able to find a balance between the two so you are able to create the perfect. Aristotle believed that you should develop the virtues that will result in living in moderation on line with the Golden mean. This leads to the virtuous action. We learn our virtues from example. From people finding the Virtuous way to live. He also described people becoming good and bad. That they do not learn how to be it, instead it is acquired rather than innate .In the 20th century there was a revival of the virtue ethics.

You needed a law enforcer with a possibility of a reward or judgement, to make sure that the ethical laws are enforced. An other philosopher questioned who was more virtuous someone who has to struggle with his or her virtues, or someone who is by nature more virtuous. They also argues that you need to distinguish between virtues and skills. Alistair MacIntyre uses Aristotle’s ideas of ethics. He also takes a historical view of ethics. He advocates the absolute relevance of human character over abstract principles.

To conclude the virtue theory encompasses all aspects of life rather than particular action. But the theory also relies on people to have the virtues such as thoughtfulness and kindness in order to follow it. Therefore I believe in a perfect world virtue ethics would work but unfortunately we don’t live in one, and only a minority of people will have the virtues already needed in order to follow the theory.

Virtue ethics describes in detail how a person should react with a moral decision but does not actually describe what the person should do in the situation. Virtue ethics is of little practical help for a person with a moral decision. We should do what the virtuous man would do, but how do we predict what this hypercritical moral person would do in our shoes. There are also conflicts of what you should do, what virtue should you constantly follow. For example your best friend steals a frying a pan to give to a homeless family of six, should you be compassionate, loyal, honest or pragmatic. Virtue ethics cannot be separated from principles and rules as a different system. We only know honesty is a virtue because we see the principle that says we have a duty to tell the truth. Without rules and principle we cannot recognize whether to admire a characteristic as a virtue. In some eyes virtue ethics can be seen as self centred for example always pitting your own needs first. Also the golden mean does not work all the time for all virtues. Some virtues are not midway between two evils but are inherently good. How is an ordinary person to know where loyalty lies in the golden mean if there is no one there to tell them?

However virtue ethics also could help someone making a moral decision. The system is easy to understand and is able to apply to anyone. Virtue ethics is based on the welfare of the entire community, so it means that everyone lives together in harmony. The theory is not idealistic or unrealistic because it looks to real people who were virtuous. Virtue ethics can fit well with a variety of philosophies. For example a humanist view, which holds that there is no god but that humanity hold the key to success. Also if someone did have a moral problem they would deal with the situation in most loving way possible which would mean that everyone involved would be able to experience the benefits of the person ambition to be kind.

To conclude I believe that in Virtue ethics is too idealistic in hoping for everyone to seek happiness for themselves and others. Also it is too vague for everyone to follow, which could lead to misunderstandings.

- –