Introduction
Since the publication of G. E. M. Anscombe’s (1958) Moral Modern Philosophy, the literature on virtue ethics has been on the rise. Yet over the past decade a growing field of philosophers have criticized the theory of virtue by offering empirical evidence against the claim that character traits, such as virtues, are responsible for most moral action. One of these situationists, Mark Alfano (2013a, 2013b, 2014), argued that the hard core of virtue ethics exists out of nine claims, four of which are under scrutiny of the empirical evidence the situationist challenge offers. This paper aims to discuss these four elements, consistency, explanatory power, predictive power and egalitarianism, in terms of embodied agents that are dynamically
…show more content…
In fact, they claim, there is only up to a 0.3 correlation between dispositions and behaviour while there is a 0.4 correlation between situations and behaviour. To get a rough understanding of what it is these situationists are challenging, a short description of what virtue ethicists claim according to these theorists will be discussed. Mark Alfano, one of the most influential situationists in the field today, summarized the virtue ethicists claims into nine elements; acquirability, stability, consistency, access, normativity, real saints, explanatory power, predictive power, and …show more content…
They tested the correlation between cheating (i.e. on a test), stealing, and lying.
One of the bigger issues virtue ethicists would take with this test, is that the age group is from [… to …]. Husthouse, following Aristotle, claimed that adolecents might be able to act virtuously, but that it is very rare for them to have enough experience to be called virtuous. Nevertheless, other experiments that do not specifically test consistency yet are often cited in support of situationism, do use adults. An example of this is the obedience test, where subjects (a) are asked to administer electric shocks to another subject (b) in the other room (who is in fact an actor), whenever b gives a wrong response to a question asked by a. As we can reliably state that it is highly unlikely that agents would normally administer life threatening shocks to others, as this would be a vicious thing to do, this is exactly what happened during the
Virtue ethics is an approach that “deemphasizes rules, consequences and particular acts and places the focus on the kind of person who is acting” (Garrett, 2005). A person’s character is the totality of his character traits. Our character traits can be goo...
Sally’s prescriptive moral theory combines two separate and unrelated principles to create an all-encompassing moral theory that can be followed by moral agents at all times. The first is rooted in consequentialism and is as follows: 1. Moral agents should cause moral pain or suffering only when the pain or suffering is justified by a moral consideration that is more important than the pain or suffering caused. The second is an autonomous theory, where other’s autonomy must be respected, it is 2. Moral agents should respect the autonomy of moral agents.
An Analysis of Matt Ridley’s The Origins of Virtue. Inwardly examining his own nature, man would prefer to see himself as a virtuously courageous being designed in the image of a divine supernatural force. Not to say that the true nature of man is a complete beast, he does possess, like many other creatures, admirable traits. As author Matt Ridley examines the nature of man in his work The Origins of Virtue, both the selfish and altruistic sides of man are explored.
Virtue ethics is a moral theory that was first developed by Aristotle. It suggests that humans are able to train their characters to acquire and exhibit particular virtues. As the individual has trained themselves to develop these virtues, in any given situation they are able to know the right thing to do. If everybody in society is able to do the same and develop these virtues, then a perfect community has been reached. In this essay, I shall argue that Aristotelian virtue ethics is an unsuccessful moral theory. Firstly, I shall analyse Aristotelian virtue ethics. I shall then consider various objections to Aristotle’s theory and evaluate his position by examining possible responses to these criticisms. I shall then conclude, showing why Aristotelian virtue ethics is an unpractical and thus an unsuccessful moral theory in reality.
A theory of virtues provides explanation on what makes something a virtue and why it is considered one. The theory analyzes historical virtues that are outdated and resonate double standards, it gives reason to why these virtues should be reconsidered and redefined. We need a theory to advise us to reflect on the true meaning of virtues and how they provide us with character traits that we ought to seek and sustain. It is important to understand and acquire virtues, which determines moral traits that ultimately convey happiness in one’s life.
Aristotle, one of the forefathers of agent morality, understood that universal and formalist rules alone could not sustain virtue. Practical wisdom, “a truth-attaining intellectual quality concerned with doing and with the things that are good for human beings” allows the moral agent to operate virtuously in a context-specific way. “[I]t is not possible,” Aristotle writes, “without practical wisdom to be really good morally.” Obedience to fixed rules cannot govern action “to the right person, to the right extent, at the right time, for the right reason, and in the right way.” In order to cultiv...
In this essay I will consider the objections to Virtue Ethics (VE) raised by Robert Louden in his article entitled On Some Vices of Virtue Ethics which was published in 1984. It is important to note at the outset of this essay that it was not until 1991 that the v-rules came up in literature. So Louden is assuming throughout his article that the only action guidance that VE can give is “Do what the virtuous agent would do in the circumstances.” I will be addressing Louden’s objections with the benefit of knowing about the v-rules. First of all, let us discuss what VE is. VE is a normative ethical theory that emphasises the virtues or moral character, thus it focuses on the moral agent. It differs from Deontology which emphasises duties or rules, and Utilitarianism which emphasises the consequences of our actions.
Critiques of Kantian moralist theory such as Williams believe that Kant’s moral theory is characterized by Impartiality and unresponsiveness to any picky associations to picky person. Abstraction from specific characteristics of an agent is what is believed by the critiques as to be a qualification for a universal moral principle that can apply to similar
Hursthouse, R. (2003, July 18). Virtue Ethics. Stanford University. Retrieved March 6, 2014, from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/ethics-virtue
Both Kantian and virtue ethicists have differing views about what it takes to be a good person. Kantian ethicists believe that being a good person is strictly a matter of them having a “good will.” On the other hand, virtue ethicists believe that being a good person is a matter of having a good character, or being naturally inclined to do the right thing. Both sides provide valid arguments as to what is the most important when it comes to determining what a person good. My purpose in writing this paper is to distinguish between Kantian ethics and virtue ethics, and to then, show which theory is most accurate.
In this paper, I argue about the applicability of virtue ethics which is one of three major branches of normative ethics. The subject of virtue ethics is normally defined as one that puts emphasis on virtues which are also known as moral character. The branch is in contrast to the majority of the approaches which places a lot of emphasizes on responsibilities and rules. The practice is also known as deontology or the practice which emphasizes on the results of actions. It is also known as consequentialism (Swanton,11).The way virtue ethics is applied in modern philosophy should be clearly evaluated.
This theory involves evaluating the individual making the decision rather than the actions or consequences themselves. Aristotle defined “virtue as a character trait that manifests itself in habitual actions.” (Boatright, 2012) This means that you are not considered virtuous because you did the right thing one time, you must be consistent. Virtue character traits include: compassion, courage, courtesy, etc. these traits not only allow for ethical decision making but they also provide happiness to the individual possessing the traits. When a person has virtue as a part of their character their actions will be moral and ethical without having to choose between what they want to do and what they should do – the decision would be the same. Their actions and feelings would coincide with the moral rationale of the virtue theory. Advantages of the virtue theory are instilling good moral character traits into individuals allowing for more ethical decision making based on personal character. Also, the virtue theory promotes happiness through good moral character which encourages people to make ethical business decisions but also ethical personal decisions – leading to a more fulfilling life. A disadvantage is virtue ethics is trying to determine a list of virtues that people should possess, each trait needs to be carefully
Harman, G. (2000). Is there a single true morality?. Explaining value and other essays in moral philosophy (pp. 77-99). Oxford: Clarendon Press ;.
In the present world we’re often taught key principles in order to live a flourishing life. Young children especially are often reared in school to become successful, and be the best they can be; and be a good person. We pose the question what does it mean to be a good person? According to Jacques Thiroux & Keith Krasemann mentions, when individuals apply these virtuous behaviors into their daily lives it promotes a decent human being (Thiroux & Krasemann, pg 78). This paper will examine the argument how having virtues can promote a balance in today’s society, and how this virtue ethics can also pose a problem.
Virtue Ethics Virtue ethics is a theory used to make moral decisions. It does not rely on religion, society or culture; it only depends on the individuals themselves. The main philosopher of Virtue Ethics is Aristotle. The. His theory was originally introduced in ancient Greek.