Aristotleian Virtue Ethics (Moral philo)

Question 1

virtue vs vice (normal def)

Answer 1

virtue ->A state or disposition (quality of character) of someone to act for a particular reason/ high moral standards
vice -> immoral standards

Question 2

How does VE differ from Utilitarianism and KD ?

Answer 2

-Utilitarianism and Kantian Deontology are both act-centred.

-Utilitarianism focuses on the consequences of an action to judge morality; it focuses on what choice would bring about the greatest amount of happiness to judge whether or not it is
moral.
- KD focuses on whether the act is wrong or right within itself (but ignores consequences). SO they are both guides as to whether an act is right or wrong.

• Virtue ethics is agent centred. It focuses on the character of the individual to judge whether the person is moral or not. It does not look at the act, rather what it means to be a good/bad person.

Question 3

Teleological

Answer 3

Everything in the universe is directed towards some final goal or ‘good’

Question 4

Aristotle’s definition of the ultimate good (‘end’) for humans

Answer 4

P1: Everything we do is aimed at some good.
P2: This good is also done for the sake of a higher good.
P3: This cannot go on forever or else, or our aim would be pointless.
C1: Therefore, there must be an ultimate good which everything we do is aimed towards.
= he says that if you can figure out what the end (goal) of all human activity is, then aim at it, this will help us to do the morally right thing.

Question 5

The relationship between pleasure and eudaimonia: Why is pleasure not the ultimate good for humans?
(Aristotle’s argument against Eudoxus)

Answer 5

1) Because other factors lead to pleasure. Pleasure cannot be the ultimate good as it can be added to to get more pleasure.
2) You can gain pleasure from immoral acts
3) Animals experience pleasure ( so is not unique to humans)
4) There are other things we aim for (virtue) that does not necessarily give us pleasure.

However, Aristotle does not claim that pleasure plays no rule in the end goal, because it does, but it is just not the end

Question 6

eudaimonia

Answer 6

= possessing a ‘good spirit’
- The good for the human life (flourishing-> a life well lived/living well)

Question 7

What eudaimonia is and is not

Answer 7

Eudaimonia IS NOT:
1) a means to an end
2) something we are born with/ suddenly get
3) completely within our control
4) mere ‘happiness’ ( a short-term, subjective, pleasure -based experience)

Eudaimonia is:
1) the final end, the supreme good, for the sake of which everything else is done
2) something we work hard to achieve - through actions that develop our character
3) partly out of our control - affected by both good and bad luck (being born in a time of war or peace)
4) ‘flourishing’ ( a process or an activity that continues throughout your lifetime)

= it is also self-sufficient (cannot be added to to make better) and is the most desirable thing

Question 8

Eudoxus’s (platos student) 4 arguments that pleasure is the ultimate good + response of A

Answer 8

• all things aim at pleasure
• all things try and avoid the opposite, pain
• we choose pleasure for its own sake
• any other good is improved by adding pleasure

R = other goods when added to pleasure, make pleasure better therefore pleasure cannot be the ultimate good if it can be improved upon by adding other goods

Question 9

final end meaning + how is eudaimonia one

Answer 9

=an end we desire for its own sake
- eudaimonia is a final end because we don’t try to achieve it as a means to achieve some goal but instead it is something that is valuable for its own sake

Question 10

ergon + arÊte

Answer 10

ergon ->function
( a knifes ergon is to cut) ( a humans ergon is reason)

arete -> property/characteristics that enables a thing to fulfil its ergon/function
( a knifes arete is its sharpness) aka virtue

Question 11

Function argument (what is a humans function)

Answer 11

P1 - The function (ergon) of something is its characteristics form of activity. ( a knifes function is to cut)
P2 - Being alive or perception cannot be the function as those are shared with other animals.
P3 - Being guided by reason is distinctive in human life.
C1 - The function of a human if s/he performs his/her function well.
C2 - A good human lives a life well guided by reason. So our ability to reason is our function.

Question 12

Criticisms of the function argument

Answer 12

1) Sartre (existence preceding essence)
- Sartre thought there was no predetermined purpose or function of a human.
-It is up to each individual to create their own purpose/function (subjective>objective)
-Satre would argue that Aristotle is wrong to claim that all humans have the same function or even a function at all.

2) The Fallacy of Composition
- every part of a human has a function; therefore the whole human race also have a function.

Question 13

Aristotle’s defintion of virtue

Answer 13

He calls virtue ‘Arete’

• they are characteristics which help someone fulfil their function and achieve eudaimonia

Question 14

The Doctrine of the Mean (aristotle)

Answer 14

A spectrum…
LHS-> Too little (deficiency= vice)
Middle -> Just right (Mean= virtue)
RHS -> Too much (excess = vice)

• moral people need to find the mean between the two vices of excess and deficiency
• this is done by thinking about your actions (thinking in accordance with rational principles)
• this does not mean one should act moderately all the time (sometimes being very angry is the right response to something)
• but rather to find the appropriate action and emotion for the situation

Question 15

Role of emotion in Virtue Ethics

Answer 15

• Virtue means expressing the right/appropriate amount of given feeling for the circumstances, not too much, not too little.
• A virtuous person has no inner conflict; they do not have to overcome their feelings to do the right thing.

Question 16

Criticisms of The Doctrine of the Mean

Answer 16

1) Are all virtues really a mean between two vices?
= Courage, for example, may not be the mean between cowardice and rashness. It seems more opposite to cowardice and could be seen as more similar to rashness.

2) Are the vices he identifies always vices?
= Modesty can be seen as a virtue - it is useful in a new situation or can be used to make someone else feel better. Boasting could be the right thing to do, for example in an interview or personal statement.

3) clashing/competing virtues
e.g when someone works hard cooking a meal but you do not like it (clashes of truthfulness and kindness virtues)

4)Difficult to be used a moral guide

It is too vague -> Not everyone can know what the mean is for that individual and that specific situation. How can we know what the right action is, for the right person, to the right extent at the right time. Therefore, the theory is too subjective and does not give a coherent, universal moral guide for society to follow.

Question 17

Aristotle’s examples of The Doctrine of the Mean

Answer 17

Deficiency -> Mean-> Excess->
Cowardice Courage Rashness
Insensible Temperance Self-indulgence
Modesty Truthfulness Boastfulness
Lack of spirit Good tempered Short-tempered

Question 18

What does Aristotle mean by virtues are ‘relative’?

Answer 18

1) a virtue that is relative to a person = running into the sea to save a drowning person would be rash for a non-swimmer but courageous for a confident swimmer

2) a virtue that is relative to a situation = being good tempered is a virtue in most situations but a large amount of anger might be the right thing if you see someone being mistreated and needing defending

Question 19

Resolutions of clashing/competing virtues (3)

Answer 19

1) Explain there is no clash -> Aristotle may say that there are no clashes, and the part of being a truly virtuous person is the ability to choose the most appropriate course of action.

2) Propose a hierarchy of virtues -> E.g that the kindness is of more value than truthfulness. However, this would alter the moral theory as we would have to have a duty to prioritize some virtues, and it would look more like a deontology (the nature of obligation/duty).

3) Hursthouse’s explanation -> There is often no resolution of the clash, but that we learn something each time and it serves as a ‘moral reminder’ for future occasions. As moral character is developed through education, Hursthouse says understanding clashes are an important part of that development. When we are faced with moral dilemmas, the choice we make will serve as a moral reminder for when we are in a similar situation in the future. If our decision had a negative outcome, we can act differently in a similar situation next time .

Question 20

The goal of a ‘moral educator’ (Annas the role of education in the development of moral character) -> for ESSAY purposes

Answer 20

Annas ideas that virtue does not merely result from habit, but education…

1) There must be a ‘moral educator’ to get a person to think for themselves for the reason which they act = So they can reflect and improve upon their actions.
2) The function of a human (to act according to rational principles) shows that we must be able to think about why we are doing what we choose to do.
3) Therefore, people need role models as ‘moral educators’ to show them how to act and think about their actions, in order to find the golden mean.

Question 21

The skill analogy between developing a skill and becoming virtuous

Answer 21

Starting point:
skill -> no one is born able to play the harp, we have the capacity to learn the harp, through observing and imitating others
virtue -> no one is born virtuous, we have the capacity to learn to become virtuous through observing and imitating others

How we learn:
skill -> we learn to play harp by practicing it, to become a habit
virtue -> we become virtuous by doing virtuous acts, to become a habit

End point:
skill -> we can play the harp
virtue -> we are a virtuous person and it becomes a fixed disposition

= To be virtuous you must act in a virtuous way and act as a virtuous person acts, i.e. you choose to act for the right reasons and ard consistent overtime in your choice, even in new or complex situations

Question 22

The role of habituation and education on the dev of moral character

Answer 22

-We are not born virtuous.
-We acquire virtue through habit/practice.
-We begin to learn virtues as children, and develop them through practice.

-Once developed, they become our stable character traits (disposition).
This also involves education and the role of role models (we imitate what other people do in order to better ourselves)

= We cannot just instantly choose to be virtuous, and we are not just naturally virtuous. We acquire moral virtues through habit, it is the result of practicing in a virtuous way we begin to learn what virtues are as children and develop them through commitment and practice. Once developed, virtues are stable traits of our character.

Question 23

Issues with eudaimonia
ISSUE: individualistic (Russell)

ISSUE: must a trait contribute to eudaimonia in order to be a virtue?

ISSUE: elitist

Answer 23

1) virtues mainly affect the individual and not the public good. Russel thinks Aristotle is committing the fallacy of composition -> parts of a thing do not reflect the whole thing.It seems eudaimonia is a personal goal and not one that necessarily benefits those around us. (Eudaimonia is individualistic).
As Response: eudaimonia is is not the good for an individual but the kind of creature that we are.

2) Aristotle’s view states that living virtuously contributes to eudaimonia (flourishing). Is it possible to think of someone who seems to be living a virtuous life but who we wouldn’t describe as flourishing? Yes, a political prisoner, or a medic at war. These acts may contribute to other good ends but may be not to the individuals flourishing.

3) “living well” is subjective. Aristotle was rich, this means his living well would be to be comfortable, have enough money, to have free time, family and friends etc. His view is Elitist . His life and therefore his theory is only distributed to the those with privilege

Question 24

Conditions for a voluntary action (examples)

Answer 24

1) Intention -> the ‘control’ condition :
The origin of the action is within us .
LEADS TO…
Autonomy: The action is not forced or done under compulsion (we have free will)

2) Knowledge-> the ‘epistemic’ condition : We know what we are doing, understanding the impact of our action and bare full responsibility (having practical wisdom)

Eg:

• dropping litter
• skipping class

Question 25

Are actions done from emotion and desire and why?

Answer 25

Aristotle places great importance on a virtuous person having right feelings, as well as right actions. Desire and emotions are part of us, as much as our reasoning. Good actions come from desire and emotion (eg self sacrifice made by love)

Question 26

Conditions of Involuntary actions + example

Answer 26

1) control condition -> externally forced : not under the agents control as to whether to perform the action or not. Therefore, the act is not intended and is caused by something external to the agent.

2) epistemic condition -> ignorance: this is where the agent lacks knowledge of what they are doing or what it’s effect would be. The agent is ignorant of certain features of their action

EG:
-someone knocks you at the bar and you spill your drink on someone else (an external factor caused this/lacks control condition)

-Child dropping litter (lacks understanding the environmental impact/ignorance)

Question 27

Example of an action that is both involuntary and voluntary + why + responsible?

Answer 27

=A tyrant kidnapping your family and threatening to kill them if you do not rob a bank and deliver the money to them.

• Voluntary because they have the knowledge of what they are doing and understand the impact of their actions
  -Involuntary because the agent was externally forced to do the action which otherwise would not have been committed

= Aristotle says he is responsible as if he were to save his family he would be praised so same goes for him being blamed if he got caught robbing the bank. He has the free will to not do the action and not bare responsibly but he chooses not to, to save his family.
- He could be pardoned if it was acknowledged he was under extreme pressure and regret however.

Question 28

Practical Wisdom

Answer 28

-Someone who knows how to live well (reach eudaimonia) and are skilled in responding appropriately to moral decisions -so can choose the mean virtue in each situation.
-To develop PW you must practice and become habituated and fully developed.

Question 29

PW issue (vague/circulation/elitist) what is it?

Answer 29

1) Gives a vague guidance on how to act
=Someone with PW knows the right thing to do and is developed over a life time. Not everyone will be equally skilled in working out what the right action is. Utilitarianism and Deontology give clear guidance on how to act but virtue ethics does not. What is the right thing to do? How do you know when you’ve reached PW? How do you develop PW?

2) The possibility of circulation
= How can we tell a person is virtuous? -> If they perform virtuous acts -> How do we know if an act is virtuous? -> If it is the type of thing a virtuous person is -> How can we tell a person is virtuous…

= Because we cannot easily clarify what virtuous acts/person is without a circular reference to the terms, this makes it hard to explain how one can be virtuous.

3) Elitist
=It remains the case that only virtuous people can really understand eudaimonia/PW. The only types of people who can reach eudaimonia are those that are privileged to be able to have a fulfilling life (ignoring those in poverty who cannot because they are financially struggling and so are not flourishing). Therefore, the theory favours the rich and cannot be generalized to the wider population.

Question 30

Conditions of non-voluntary actions

Answer 30

1) ignorance -> unaware of consequences of action
2) involuntary -> externally forced, no free will
3) no regret/guilt

= done through ignorance for which the person isn’t pained or sorry for afterwards

=E.G if someone pushes you into a child who gets hurt but you laugh and walk away

Question 31

Virtue ethics def

Answer 31

An agent-centred moral theory, focusing on the character of the individual in order to judge whether a person is moral or not.

VE differs from Util/Deon as it does not correlate acts with morality, rather what it means to be a good/bad person.

Question 32

Criticisms against Aristotles idea of an ultimate good?

Answer 32

X -> some actions appear not to have a purpose/good (daydreaming, doodling). Undermines p1.
X-> fallacy of composition