A Critique Of Virtue Based Ethics

1338 Words3 Pages

Question 1: According to Kant, what is required for an action to have moral worth? What kinds of actions are excluded from having moral worth? What would be an example of one that meets Kant’s requirements?
According to Kant, an action that is good has value, but is not necessarily moral. Kant says that an action that is performed out of a sense of duty is the only action that has moral value (The Foundation of Ethics, pg. 223). Kant states that an action that is morally right or morally wrong is right or wrong in all situations. All actions are excluded from having moral worth if a person has any inclination for doing the action. A person must do actions out of a sense of duty not because they want to or not. He uses the example of the inquiring murderer. He explains that if a friend is hiding in your house from a murderer and the murderer knocks on the door, then you …show more content…

316). These dispositions determine how a person acts in different situations. A moral principle is the moralities of right and wrong that are accepted by an individual and the society they live in (A Critique of Virtue Based Ethics, pg. 318-319). The main difference between the two is that moral principles are somewhat universal and virtues are individualized. People around the world believe that murder, adultery, and torture is wrong. However, people do not believe that lying in certain situations is morally wrong, but some people do. Frankena states that moral principles and virtues are complementary to the same morality (A Critique of Virtue Based Ethics, pg. 318). Frankena states, a man’s actions are more even if his inclinations to do those actions are not. A man who strives to do his duty because he wants to, is still moral even if he is getting gratification from doing his duty (A Critique of Virtue Based Ethics, pg.

Open Document