Virtue Ethics

• what type of theory is virtue theory

  agent centred: judges the character of the person committing the act (how good/virtuous they are) as opposed to the action/consequences of the action

  normative

  consequentialist
• what is virtue theory

  one can be good/virtuous by fulfilling your function well (showing excellence).

  to fulfill our function we must develop skills (virtues)
• what is virtue theory also known as

  practical wisdom (phronesis)

  ability to reflect on what ought to be done to achieve a virtuous end
• what do these terms mean:

  telos =

  eudaimonia =

  ergon =


  everyone has an end purpose

  living a fulfilled and flourishing life (true happiness)

  function
• who was Aristotle


  born 384BC and was a Greek philosopher who studied under Plato and went on to tutor Alexander the Great and open his own school, the lyceum
• how do the philosophies of Aristotle and Plato differ

  - for Plato, philosophical wisdom and understanding lie away from this world in the world of forms

  - for Aristotle, it's this world which provides us with wisdom and understanding
• develop the idea of ergon/function

  - everything has an ergon, and our aim in life is to fulfill our function well

  - we require tools to help us fulfill our function, and these are virtues (necessary character traits needed for us to flourish)

  - for example a tin-opener must be sharp and efficient to fulfil its function well
• what is a virtue. give examples

  character traits/beneficial qualities

  e.g. wisdom, courage, compassion, honesty
• what is the doctrine of the mean. give examples

  a virtuous person will have practical wisdom, so will have these feelings at the right time, on the right occasion, towards the right people, for the right motive and in the right way

  each virtue lies in the mean of two vices (excess and deficiency)

  e.g. courage between cowardice and foolhardiness

  hard work between laziness and exhaustion

  comparable to middle way in Buddhism
• what is the good life for humans according to Aristotle

  the life lived according to reason (this is the function we must fulfill)

  avoiding hedonism (pleasure), as this does not lead to true happiness (eudaimonia)

  virtues are the only type of happiness worth pursuing
• what does the Wizard of Oz analogy demonstrate

  that you need to find the virtues within yourself and develop them through practice - you cannot just be given them
• develop the idea of eudaimonia

  ultimate/true happiness/flourishing

  relates to the activity of living and realising the full potential humans have (not a state of mind)

  connected to morality as happiness is inseparable from other people
• how do you develop virtues

  developed through practice and habit - not innate (we do not have them at birth). 'we become just by doing just acts'

  comparable to learning to play an instrument 'it is from playing the lyre that both good and bad lyre-players are produced
• what is the example used to show why hedonism isn't positive

  George Best, who had a very hedonistic life of women, cars and money, but wasn't truly happy or flourishing
• what is a virtuous person


  you act in a balanced way of your own free will with honesty of intention

  you're reflective and rational

  you avoid extremes
• why is reason key for Aristotle

  humans are unique in possessing reason

  we achieve eudaimonia when we let reason guide our character and virtues

  reason also helps us understand our function and therefore how to fulfill it and be good
• what are the 3 types of excellences


  excellences of character - controlling desire and emotion (moral virtue)

  excellences of practical reasoning - having the skills to know what is good

  excellences of theoretical reasoning - intellectual virtue, e.g. being good at philosophy/maths
• what is the difference between intellectual and moral virtues


  intellectual virtues come about through teaching and requires experience and time

  moral virtues come about through habit and aren't innate
• what is Alistair ManIntyre's view of virtue theory

  - argues virtue theory is still the best way of defining moral behaviour

  - we need to return to recognising family and community as important (developing virtues for benefit of others not just ourselves) rather than being individualistic or isolated, traits which developed after the enlightenment (e.g. Kant's focus on reason alone)

  - he assesses the ways virtues have changed over time, for example how cunning changed to wisdom, and the addition of the theological virtues and concludes we have abandoned the virtues, coming up with 3 archetypal characters (manager, aesthete and therapist)
• what is Philippa Foot's view of virtue theory

  - virtues can correct human tendencies/negative behaviours and are beneficial (e.g. self-interest can be corrected by benevolence)

  - practising good habits is essential and necessary for our flourishing

  - uses analogy of piece of wood left outside. it will naturally warp and change shape and needs continual attention to make it straight
• outline a practical example of virtue ethics

  euthanasia:

  deontology - Kant would say this is using yourself as an means to an end and breaching your perfect duty to self. Kant calls it irrational and you wouldn't want it to be universalised

  virtue ethics: most compassionate to allow for euthanasia in certain circumstances as you cannot flourish/fulfill your ergon in pain. but you could argue suicide is hedonistic (driven by pain) and you can't fulfill your function if you're dead
• how does the Bible support virtue ethics

  NT:

  - Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:7). pray for those who persecute you, turn the other cheek, be meek not proud

  OT:

  - Proverbs: encourages against hedonism

  - Ecclesiastes: encourages balance (a time for love and a time for hate)
• what are the strengths of virtue ethics (8)

  - recognises that bad people don't have to have acted badly to be bad (e.g. case of loner in mental turmoil)

  - wholistic as it recognises the importance of human emotions and relationships when decision-making (e.g. seeing a homeless person inspires more compassion than making a monthly donation to charity)

  - encourages moral wisdom not just rule learning (e.g. categorical imperative and felicific calculus)

  - is not prescriptive and displaces rules as they're not entirely useful (flexible, allows for cultural differences)

  - brings communities together with one focus (eudaimonia)

  - encourages us to take pleasure in being virtuous, rather than doing it for the sake of duty

  - rejects the idea that every moral issue can be solved

  - encourages autonomy
• what are the weaknesses of virtue ethics (8)

  - virtues can clash (e.g. whistleblowing)

  - function argument succumbs to the fallacy of composition (assuming a whole from a part)

  - doesn't provide enough guidance for some

  - virtues may sometimes be bad (e.g. courageous criminals)

  - virtues may require self-sacrifice which is not eudaimonic

  - some vices can be good, e.g. literary envy

  - sometimes happiness may lie at extremes/in hedonism (e.g. George Best)

  - intellectualises emotion into virtues and vices, pleasure and pain (opposes compassion/empathy)
• what are the similarities between virtue ethics and deontology (7)

  - both work towards an end goal: eudaimonia and summum bonum

  - reason is key in both

  - both have an emphasis on autonomy/freedom of choice

  - modern versions of both accessible to modern life

  - both seek to fulfil your purpose

  - both focus on practicality (practical wisom/reason)

  - deontology argues carrying out ones duty is virtuous
• what are the differences between virtue ethics and deontology

  - action centred vs agent centred

  - consequentialist vs non-consequentialist

  - relativist vs absolutist (flexible/prescriptive vs not). deontology = objective moral law (fixed) whereas virtue ethics can change

  - focus on duty vs focus on virtue

  - virtue theory considers emotion as well as reason whereas deontology only considers reason

  - a priori reasoning used in deontology as opposed to virtues being learnt through a posteriori experience