evaluation of Aristotelian virtue ethics

Question 1

main claims of Aristotelian virtue ethics

Answer 1

• a morally good life is one where humans fulfil their function through exhibiting good character (virtue)
• focus on the actor and their character rather than the act
• to flourish- in order to flourish you need to fulfil the function that is unique to the characteristics of human beings

Question 2

1st objection against Aristotelian virtue ethics

Answer 2

cannot give sufficiently clear guidance on how to act

Question 3

how is Aristotelian virtue ethics unable to give sufficiently clear guidance on how to act

Answer 3

• “the right time, right object, right person, right motive, right way” shows how things are complicated, it gives us no actual help with understanding on how to act
• e.g. how often we should get angry, how angry we should get.
• we have no clear guidance on how to act as it is unclear on what is too much or too little and what the right time is
• we are then faced with a moral dilemma which is an issue because normative moral theory should give us guidance on how to act morally
• Aristotle claims that motives of virtue and honour cannot be fully routinised and put into a system of rules

Question 4

response to virtue ethics cannot give sufficiently clear guidance on how to act

Answer 4

Guidance and learning can still happen without rules, it can be done through moral exemplars and habituation

Question 5

Guidance and learning can still happen without rules, it can be done through moral exemplars and habituation

Answer 5

• ethics is unmodifiable, it cannot be put into a system of rules and we cannot make precise rules for them
• Aristotle never intended that the doctrine of the mean is to be helpful in a way that it can help us understand how to act
• we cannot figure out what is right and wrong by just applying a rule like the doctrine of the mean, we must have practical wisdom
• through moral exemplars, education and habituation we learn practice wisdom in order to see how we can act ethically
• practical wisdom isn’t just about applying easy rules either, it is about seeing what to do in which requires virtue of character and a lot of experience
• the objection is said to be thinking of guidance too much in terms of rules, just because practical wisdom is not a set or rules that doesn’t mea that it provides us no guidance at all
• Aristotle suggests that we think about situations in terms of virtues rather than ‘could everyone do this?’
• virtue ethics reflects the imprecise nature of ethics by being flexible and situation sensitive, it can also be action guiding by observing the example of virtuous agent
• acquiring virtue is like acquiring a skill (skill analogy), you do not need to learn ethics, instead you need to practice it

Question 6

what is a virtuous agent

Answer 6

the agent who has fully developed moral character, who possessed the futures and act in accordance with them, and who knows what to do by example

Question 7

counter-response to guidance and learning can still happen without rules, it can be done through moral exemplars and habituation

Answer 7

the use of exemplars and practice still doesn’t solve the issue , it still remains unclear on how to act

Question 8

the use of exemplars and practice still doesn’t solve the issue , it still remains unclear on how to act

Answer 8

1. in order to learn from a moral exemplar, you need to first identify one but this cannot be done unless you already understand virtue
   a. this seems that you are either someone who cant find a moral exemplar
   b. or you are someone who can find one, but therefore don’t need one as it would mean that you already understand virtue
2. even if you could identify a moral exemplar, it is very difficult and maybe impossible to learn from their actions because you are different to them and the situations that you face will be different
   a. this would mean that you cannot apply what you see them do in such a way that you can apply it to your own decision making
3. in relation to the idea that we learn through practice, in the absence of a role model, it seems impossible for us to know that we are practicing the right way and in the right way:
   a. we may as well be making things worse
   b. ingraining the wrong habits (i.e. vices)

Question 9

response to the use of exemplars and practice still doesn’t solve the issue , it still remains unclear on how to act

Answer 9

everyone has the capacity to recognise virtuous people/decision making and becoming virtuous

Question 10

everyone has the capacity to recognise virtuous people/decision making and becoming virtuous

Answer 10

• although that no one is virtuous innately:
  a. everyone has the capacity to recognise virtuous people and virtuous decision making
  b. and become virtuous
• we are adapted by nature to receive virtue and are made perfect by habit
• as virtue is fulfilling our human nature, we have an innate capacity to become virtuous and so:
  a. we can recognise virtue when we see it, so we can find role models
  b. this capacity that humans have to understand virtue will help us to apply what we see role models doing to our own cases and situations
  c. we will be able to tell when we are making progress in our practice, when we are moving towards virtue

Question 11

2nd objection to Aristotelian virtue ethics

Answer 11

the problem of clashing/competing virtues

Question 12

the problem of clashing/competing virtues

Answer 12

• Aristotle cannot tell us what to do when the virtues make competing demands on us, such that whatever we do requires us to act in a way that conflicts with virtue
• there is no way of acting virtuously
• cases in which apparently the requirements of different virtues conflict because they point in opposite directions:
  a. charity prompts me to kill the person who would better be off dead but justice forbids it
  b. honesty points to telling the hurtful truth, kindness and compassion to remaining silent or even lying.

Question 13

response to the problem of clashing/competing virtues

Answer 13

• this conflict is only apparent as virtue is context specific with no absolute rules
• the person of practical wisdom will be able to find the mean for each virtue in that specific situation in such way that they are still respecting both virtues
  (i.e. the fact that both virtues are relevant will mean that each one will look slightly different)
• Aristotle denies that conflict between virtues take place as you need practical wisdom to understand what each virtue actually requires you to do in this particular situation
• with such understanding, you will be able to discover a path of action which satisfies the demands of each virtue that is relevant to the situation

Question 14

response to the problem of clashing/competing virtues analogy

Answer 14

• a formula one car will be good when it has both raw speed and delicate handling, and it is up to the skilled engineer to steer a path between these 2 virtues (raw speed and delicate handling)
• so a person with practical wisdom, can steer a path between apparently clashing virtues in any giving situation.
  
  • virtue ethics have no interest in the creation of a codified moral rule book covering all situations and instead put on the responsibility on the skill of the virtuous person when deciding how to act
• it is not the case that honesty and kindness clash, instead kindness and honesty can both be shown as long as you are honest in a kind way

Question 15

counter-response to the response to the problem of clashing/competing virtues

Answer 15

tragic choices

Question 16

tragic choices

Answer 16

• whilst sometimes there is a way to fulfil both virtues, there are nonetheless some situations where it seems that there is no virtuous way out

(e.g. a tragic choice is found in the 1982 film ‘Sophie’s choice’ where a mother is forced to choose which of her 2 children is sent to the gas chamber and both of them would be killed of she did not choose)

Question 17

response to tragic choices

Answer 17

• if the case that is presented is one where virtues can play no role then there seems to be no option for the virtue ethicist other than to accept that in such rare cases, it just isn’t possible to be virtuous.
• however, virtue ethicist might argue that this doesn’t stop virtue being relevant in the vast majority of decisions

Question 18

3rd objection to Aristotelian virtue ethics

Answer 18

Virtuous traits do not always contribute to eudaimonia

Question 19

what is a virtue

Answer 19

virtue is a trait that contributes to or is a constituent of eudaimonia and we ought to develop virtues the eudaimonia claims that they precisely contribute to eudaimonia.

Question 20

Virtuous traits do not always contribute to eudaimonia

Answer 20

• Aristotle claims that for one to achieve eudaimonia, they must acquire virtues
• however they issue is that what seems to be morally good may not actually be morally gapped for me
• there are cases where exhibiting a virtuous trait does not contribute to ones eudaimonia
• acting virtuously and morally can and often does require a self sacrifice
• e.g. acting courageously and pursuing justice might require me to put my own health and life at risk
• this means that it is wrong to claim that virtues are traits that lead to eudaimonia
  (i.e. that what’s morally good is morally good for me)

this is an issue for 2 reasons:
1. the theory fails in its key aim of giving an account to flourish because being virtuous won’t always lead to flourishing
2. Aristotle is wrong to claim that eudaimonia is the final end of all human action as some virtuous action does not contribute to eudaimonia

Question 21

response to Virtuous traits do not always contribute to eudaimonia

Answer 21

virtuous traits do always lead to eudaimonia, the moral good is always good for the individual so in the cases above, people are still flourishing

Question 22

virtuous traits do always lead to eudaimonia, the moral good is always good for the individual so in the cases above, people are still flourishing

Answer 22

• some have defended Aristotle by arguing that even in the cases above, doing what is morally good as contributed to what is good for that individual
  
  • the moral goos and the good for me are still the same (i.e. virtues are traits that lead to eudaimonia
• the only reason why people may think that virtues do not lead to eudaimonia is because you’re starting off with misguided preconceptions about what is good for me
• if you think that a person is not better off in terms of flourishing (i.e. not having a good life, it is only because you think that flourishing means something different to Aristotle.
• like always being happy or living to an old age or having a lot of money for yourself, only then you can say that virtues in the examples do not contribute to these things so they do not contribute to flourishing.
• however, for Aristotle, this isn’t what makes a flourishing human life, as a flourishing human life is one that exhibits the virtues: a good human life is one that is haracteristsed by kindness, courage, truthfulness
• exhibiting these virtues still contribute to someones flourishing even In cases where they make things harder for you in some other way

Question 23

counter-response for virtuous traits do always lead to eudaimonia, the moral good is always good for the individual so in the cases above, people are still flourishing

Answer 23

if the moral good is what is good for the individual, then this makes virtue ethics egoistic

Question 24

if the moral good is what is good for the individual, then this makes virtue ethics egoistic

Answer 24

• it seems to mean that for Aristotle, in choosing how I live I should be virtuous because it is good for me.
• it improves my own character and allows me to achieve eduaimonia
• this has led to some object that Aristotelian virtue ethics is based on the fact that it is an egoist theory of ethics and it is agent centred
• it ends up being self centred and lacking in altruism
• morality is supposed to be about other people, it denials with our actions to the extent that they affect other people
• virtue ethics seems to be essentially interested in the acquisition of the virtues as part of the agents own well being and flourishing

Question 25

response to if the moral good is what is good for the individual, then this makes virtue ethics egoistic

Answer 25

the moral good will, in fact always be good for you, you can avoid egoism as long as your motive isnt your own good

Question 26

the moral good will, in fact always be good for you, you can avoid egoism as long as your motive isnt your own good

Answer 26

• our motive is important to virtue ethics
• a virtuous life is a flourishing life but your reason for being virtuous shouldn’t be and cannot be your own flourishing
• this is because a person who does what the courageous person would do but for wrong reasons
• e.g. because It benefits them, rather than just because it is virtuous is not actually courageous

Question 27

4th objection is Aristotelian virtue ethics

Answer 27

the circulatory involved in defining virtuous acts and virtuous persons in terms of each other

Question 28

circular definition

Answer 28

a circular definition is one that uses the terms being defined as part of the definition

e.g. an animal is human if and only if it has human parents

Question 29

the circulatory involved in defining virtuous acts and virtuous persons in terms of each other

Answer 29

Aristotelian virtue ethics is seen to include a circular definition

• this is an issue because it is uninformative
• in Aristotelian virtue ethics:
• an act is virtuous if it is an act that would be done by a virtuous person in this situation
• a virtuous person Is a person who is disposed to do virtuous acts
• we are no clearer on what a virtuous act is and what a virtuous person is