aristotleian virtue ethics

Question 1

summarise Aristotle’s view on ethics

Answer 1

teological theory

arguing that we should focus on human character

and achieving eudaimonia by becoming virtuous over time

rather than focusing on individual actions

Question 2

define superior aim

Answer 2

our ultimate goals

Question 3

define subordinate aim

Answer 3

secondary aims we fulfil to help reach our superior aims

Question 4

define eudaimonia

Answer 4

a state of being that is the ultimate human flourishing

Question 5

define ergon

Answer 5

function

Question 6

define arete

Answer 6

the right qualities/virtues something must have to fulfil its ergon

Question 7

what is the function argument?

Answer 7

1. everything has a function
2. so, humans have a function
3. what makes us human is our rational soul
4. so, to function as humans we must be rational
5. something fulfils its function well (i.e. its good) by having the right virtues / arete
6. so, a good human is one who is virtuous their rational soul
7. so, we reach eudaimonia by being virtuous through our rational soul

Question 8

what is the doctrine of the mean?

Answer 8

virtues are the average/mean between two extremes (vices of deficiency and excess)

e.g. cowardice — courage — recklessness
shy ———— modest —- shameless

Question 9

what is the skill analogy?

Answer 9

acquiring virtues is similar to acquiring skills e.g cycling, piano

— no-one is born with ability to cycle, but the capacity to learn

— you can’t learn theory only, you have to learn through practice and habituation

— eventually, the skill / virtue becomes like second nature

Question 10

what does Aristotle believe about the soul?

Answer 10

morality is balancing the needs of:

the rational soul (scientific factual knowledge part, calculative part)

+

the non-rational (spirited desires part, vegetative basic needs part)

Question 11

what is phronesis?

Answer 11

practical wisdom: a general understanding of good so that the person can think through and act according to what is good

(developed through habituation)

Question 12

what does Aristotle say about moral responsibility?

Answer 12

we should praise/condemn actions depending on if they were done voluntarily/involuntarily

Question 13

what are the 5 types of acts that determine moral responsibility according to Aristotle?

Answer 13

Voluntary acts

Involuntary acts due to compulsion

Involuntary acts partially due to compulsion

Involuntary acts due to ignorance

Non-voluntary acts

Question 14

what are voluntary acts according to Aristotle?

Answer 14

an act done with the intention of bringing about those consequences (deliberately step on someones foot on a train)

moral responsibility: YES

Question 15

what are involuntary acts due to compulsion according to Aristotle?

Answer 15

an act where someone is compelled/forced to do so by means that are 100% out of their control (train lurches so you accidentally step on someone’s foot)

moral responsibility: NO

Question 16

what is an involuntary act due to partial compulsion/ ‘mixed’ act

Answer 16

act where force out of your control compells you to do it, but you have some degree of choice (someone holds a gunpoint to your head and tells you to step on someones foot)

moral responsibility: DEPENDS

Question 17

what is an involuntary act due to ignorance according to Aristotle?

Answer 17

act where you were unaware of the consequences and would have behaved differently if you were aware

moral responsibility: NO

Question 18

what is a non-voluntary act according to Aristotle?

Answer 18

an act that you did unintentionally but would have done intentionally anyway if given the choice (you accidentally step on someone’s foot but don’t regret it because you would have done so anyway)

moral responsibility: YES

Question 19

what are the 4 potential problems with virtue ethics?

Answer 19

Lack of guidance

Circularity

Problems with Virtues

Problems with Eudaimonia

Question 20

explain the lack of guidance problem with Aristotleian virtue ethics

Answer 20

doesn’t offer a specific practical guide of how to act: too subjective and therefore inapplicable to reality

Question 21

what is Aristotle’s possible response to lack of guidance problem?

Answer 21

virtue ethics isn’t supposed to give a set of RULES: you need to develop phronesis through habituation independently through experience

just bc no specific course of action is provided, doesn’t mean it provides zero guidance

Question 22

explain the issue with circularity against Aristotleian virtue ethics

Answer 22

he defines virtuous ACTS and virtuous PEOPLE in terms of each other:
“a virtuous act is something a virtuous person would do, and a virtuous person is someone who does virtuous acts”

so, it’s a circular argument and doesn’t say anything meaningful about what virtue actually is

Question 23

Aristotle’s possible response to circular argument critique

Answer 23

Aristotle describes the virtuous person in terms of EUDAIMONIA so definition isn’t circular

(but.. what is eudaimonia?? its too vague and subjective)

Question 24

explain the problems with virtues of Aristotleian virtue ethics

Answer 24

— virtues may clash (mercy and justice)

— list of 12 virtues may not be exhaustive

— list of virtues is inflexible and only considers Aristotle’s own culture

Question 25

what are Aristotle’s possible responses to the problems with virtue argument against his theory?

Answer 25

— conflicts between virtues are impossible (as they aren’t rigid, unbreakable rules): use phronesis to know which virtue to follow

— all virtues link back to 1 of his 12 so the list is essentially exhaustive

— Aristotle would say his list of virtues is correct, even if other cultures disagree (but this is kind of a shit response bc how do we know he’s right and others are wrong)
OR you could add more virtues, but how do we know what’s right? How many can we add? Does this make it too subjective?

Question 26

explain the problem of eudaimonia

Answer 26

there is a difference between eudaimonia and moral good: people can lead morally good lives without achieving full human flourishing, happiness and eudaimonia

so, Aristotleian virtue ethics fail to fully explain what morality is

Question 27

possible response to the eudaimonia vs moral good problem with Aristotleian virtue ethics

Answer 27

Aristotle was never trying to answer the question of what a morally good life is.

eudaimonia + virtue ethics is about a good life in GENERAL… being morally good is necessary but not sufficient for eudaimonia

Question 28

what did Mary Anscombe say about virtue ethics?

Answer 28

• rejected deontology and consequentialism
• acts can’t be moral in themselves, we must consider them in relation to the character of the person committing them
• we need to oil a machine not bc oil itself is ‘good’, but because its good for that machine
• so we need to do certain acts not bc they’re ‘good’, but because they’re good for our character

ALSO

• to have absolute moral rules, we need a rule-giver (God)
• without God, we can’t have moral system of laws

—> so virtue ethics is the only appropriate ethical system

Question 29

aristotle virtue ethics essay

Answer 29

critiques against virtue ethics fail as they fundamentally misunderstand the purpose of virtue ethics, which is to provide general principles of bringing the self closer to eudaimonia, moral fulfillment and virtue rather than to provide categorical, exact, rules or formulations of morality. so, it remains yet to be successfully disproved.

1. circular argument, defines virtuous acts and virtuous people in terms of each other, so no exact clear definition of virtue

Aristotle: but virtuous person is defined in terms of eudaimonia, virtue is flourishing hollistically as a human being by using rationality to overtime develop phronesis and a sense of what acts should and shouldn’t be done based on doctrine of mean.

BUT problems with eudaimonia: morality isn’t eudaimonia. You can live a moral life without eudaimonia e.g. devoting yourself to saving people in an epidemic in a developing country and dying of that disease.

Aristotle: simple, VE isn’t simply trying to define morality itself, it focusses instead on a hollistically good life leading to eudaimonia. Morality and virtue is necessary but not sufficient for eudaimonia, as we should allow ourselves to flourish as well as treating others with virtue.

SO circular argument and problems with eudaimonia critique are both somewhat convincing but ultimately fail to understand the focus of VE and treat it as a theory of exact guidance like Kant or Util, but it’s not trying to be this.

2. problems with virtues: not exhaustive? clashing?

possible but limited response: the list IS correct and all possible virtues fall under the categories of Ari’s listed 12.

BUT this isn’t certain and may be disputed, surely a list culturally relative to Ari wouldn’t be exhaustive of all cultures.

This is true. but the critique lacks understanding of VE, as the exact list is not important, what’s more important is that we always apply the doctrine of the mean to any situation. The list is subjective and relative to ourselves, as long as we understand and apply the principles of eudaimonia and use phronesis this is good.

BUT lack of guidance critique.

Aristotle: as said before, this is misunderstanding the purpose of VE. We do not need an exact course of rules laid out for us like util or Kant, this allows us to apply morality to ourselves and deals with the issue of moral authority as we all live our own lives through virtue without conforming to other’s ideas of what it is (Kant’s imperatives, Bentham’s calculus etc)