Virtue ethics

Komilla Chadha 2010

 Virtue Theory

Contents

1. The Agent- 2. The principles 3. Eudaimonia

Centred approach of Aristotle’s and the Doctrine
to ethics (P3) Virtue Theory (P4) of the Golden
Mean (P5)

4. Importance of 5. Modern Virtue 6. Evaluating

Virtue Theory and Theory (P7) Virtue Theory (P8)
examples of
virtuous people
(P6)

Page 2
 Virtue Theory

1. The agent centred approach

For Aristotle the ‘golden
mean’ (or virtue) wasn’t the
same for everyone or all
circumstances this is why he
emphasised on an
autonomous, person-centred
and virtue-centred morality.

Page 3
 Virtue Theory

2. Principles of Aristotle’s
Virtue Ethics
eudaimonia - i.e. human becoming virtuous as
Virtue theory or otherwise flourishing. In order to achieve analogous to learning to play a
know as Aretaic ethics, aretaic this we should act virtuously. musical instrument. For
meaning excellence, originates (For more depth on example both activities are
back to the Stoics. Even Plato eudaimonia see section 3). difficult but possible and
had formulated his own version require us to learn simple
of Virtue Theory yet none are Now that we know why we things first before we jump to
as popular, particularly in this need to act virtuously we can the more complex. Once we
last century, as Aristotleʼs figure out what the virtues are. accomplish this with the help of
version. a teacher (having a pedagogue
Virtues are positive character was crucial for Aristotle) we
Virtue theory was revolutionary traits and Aristotle divides them can enjoy the rewards and
because it is agent-centred. into two categories intellectual flourish (which in terms of
This is still today a relatively virtues and moral virtues. becoming virtuous is reaching
knew branch to ethics. More Intellectual virtues are ones eudaimonia).
detail on this can be found in that are taught by a pedagogue
section 1. whereas moral virtues are For many understanding the
ones that develop through application of this theory
Theory of causality habitual behaviour. Below I proves the most difficult
have listed the intellectual because the theory does not
In order to understand Virtue virtues. set any clear rules.
Theory (VT) we first must
understand Aristotleʼs theory of Intellectual Virtues But essentially what Aristotle is
causality because that saying we will make ethical
underlies VT. Primary decision based on whether
they will help us to develop the
According to Aristotle, in order Wisdom virtuous and become virtuous.
to understand something fully Intelligence
we must address the thingʼs Scientific Knowledge However, Aristotle said that
four causes; Practical Wisdom while all people have the
Art potential to become virtuous
- Material (what is made of) only a few achieve it and those
- Formal (Form/shape) Secondary are ʻgentlemen and
- Efficient (Agent/producer) philosophersʼ. This statement
- Final (Purpose) Cleverness seems a bit archaic to use
Resourcefulness today so scholars interpret this
The final cause being the most Understanding as external factors affecting
important. Judgement upbringing which determine
whether or not one becomes
So how does this affect VT? There are 12 moral virtues virtuous.
which are listed and explained
Well if we apply this principle to in section 3.
humans then we can see the
basis of VT. Aristotle says the Many modern philosophers
Final cause for humans is have described the process of

Page 4
 Virtue Theory

3. Eudaimonia and the

Doctrine of the Gold Mean
Doctrine of the Golden
Eudaimonia Mean
Eudaimonia translates as the Virtues as stated before are
ʻflourishingʼ. What Aristotle positive states of characters and
means by this is that the human they are described as the
race will reach its maximum ʻGolden Meanʼ often. This is
potential and society will be at because Aristotle said it is not
its highest level to date. good to posses too much or too
Eudaimonia is something little of a characteristics. The
that should be achieved for its two extremes he called vices.
intrinsic For example he
value not as said courage is a
a means to good attribute to
an end.
‘We are what we have - if we are
Aristotle repeatedly do; rash however
did not
excellence, then and have too
believe in much of it we
an after like is not an act posses the vice
Plato. but a habit’ of excess and if
I believe we do not have
that Adam enough and are
Smith theory cowards we
of specialisation/division of posses the vice of deficiency.
labour is very closely knitted to The 12 moral virtues which
the idea of eudaimonia. If we make up this golden mean are
interprets flourishing as a high depicted below.
societal status we might say that 1. Courage
like by exercising the virtues we 2. Temperance
develop our strengths - we can 3. Liberality
develop our skills through 4. Magnificence
practice and soon there will 5. High-mindedness
reach a point when the division 6. Right ambition
of labour will occur. At this point 7. Good temper
we could say society would 8. Friendliness
ʻflourishʼ as we would have 9. Sincerity
reached the highest level of 10.Wittiness
productivity. 11.Modesty
12.Just resentment
Page 5
 Virtue Theory

4. Importance of Virtue
Theory and examples
of virtuous people. .

Virtue theory is importance because it
brought a whole new dimension into ethics -
taking it away from act-centred to person-
centred. It also did something that no other
did it took into account human and emotion
into ethical decision making. The theory
also has profound impacts on society. If
people are constantly trying to become
virtuous then this has the impact of making
Page 6
society more moral and can have positive
effects.
We can see examples of virtuous in the
past and today. If we take examples like
David Beckham or Russell Brand they
depict virtues such as wittiness whereas if
look at Mother Teresa we may see virtues
like modesty and sincerity. So ultimately we
can use anyone as an example of a virtuous
person.
 Virtue Theory

5. Modern Virtue Theory

Elizabeth Anscombe
Anscombe critised other theories for
being so focused on autonomous
forgetting that there is a social
aspect of morality that binds
community. She also believed that
our society is becoming secular that
is why we cannot rely on the idea of
reward or punishment and the divine
law.
Alasdair Maclntyre
Martha Nussbaum Maclyntyre believed context for key for
Nussbaum interprets understanding everything. He believed the
Aristotle’s virtues as virtues changed over time hence VE was
absolutes. She believes more applicable and practical than any other
that the relativist approach ethical theory. For example homeric virtues
is incomplete with like physical strength became athenian
Aristotle’s theory. Many virtues like friendship. He also differentiates
modern philosophers between two types of goods; internal and
disagree with this. external. Internal goods are ones that are
intrinsic e.g. giving money to charity and
external goods are instrumental e.g. inspiring
others to give money to charity.

Philippa Foot
Foot believed in making the
world a better place not dry
theorising ethics (she was
founder of oxfam). She was
a modern virtue theorist
because she believed virtues
weren’t just good for
individuals but for society.
Michael Slote
Slote believed rather than
eudaimonia humans strive for
their well-bring. He argues
virtuous motives are not only
necessary but sufficient for
human well-being.
Page 7
Ben Franklin
Franklin was a utilitarian
virtue theorists and
believed the best way to
be utilitarian was the
practice of the virtues.
 Virtue Theory
6. Evaluating Virtue Theory
Strengths
1. Human nature and emotion is
taken into account which no other
ethical theory of the time manages
to do so profoundly.
2. Given that the virtues changes
with time and different cultures
means that it is more applicable and
easier to understand.
3. It is a secular theory i.e. relies no
belief in God hence many people
would be attracted to use it.
4. Does not look at individual acts
but all the acts committed in a
lifetime as a whole giving room for
mistakes and learning. This means it
is more realistic as people seem to
learn over time.
5. It is flexible which it is easier to
apply to different situations.
6. The focus isn’t on acts it is on
what it means to be human and as
Zagzebski says ‘persons are
ontologically more fundamental than
acts; acts are defined in terms of
persons”.
Page 8
Weaknesses
1. The theory is too vague. It does
not clearly tell you what to do and
what not. It relies on interpretation.
It is anti-codificable
2. How can different acts be moral
for different society - doesn’t this
imply that morality is something
which is made up by society.
3.Does not address the question
when people are committing
unmoral acts but believed they are
working virtuously. This is a result
from the vagueness from the theory.
4. According to the philosopher
Pojman some rules cannot be
broken which many people agree
with.
5. Some people believe that if you
were going to judge character then
this is done by actions not virtues
hence this ethical theory is
pointless.