Virtue ethics Flashcards
WWhich two figures developed it?
VE was first found in Plato, but it was developed into a fully-fledged moral philosophy by his student, A
How can it be seen as culturally relative?
The Ancient Greek culture, captured best in the works of Homer, emphasised many of the virtues that A listed in the Nicomachean Ethics
What statelet did P and A belong to in Greece?
Ancient Greece was split into several statelets (Sparta, Athens etc.). S, P and A belonged to Athens, a statelet known for its promotion of democracy and philosophy
How can it be considered individually relative?
Both A and P belonged to the Athenian upper class, and their descriptions of the virtuous individual are inevitably tied with their conception of the ideal gentlemen
How does VE reflect the differences between P and A?
A rejected P’s theory of forms, which held that there was an abstract ideal of things like Good and Justice, to which specific virtues corresponded. Instead, he grounded the goodness of virtues in what he considered to be human nature. This reflects that fact that P was a rationalist while A was an empiricist
Why is VE different in its focus compared to other ethical theories?
Other ethical theories are ‘action centred’, they focus on what constitutes a good or bad action. However, VE is ‘agent centred’ since its focus is on what makes a person good or virtuous. This makes sense when we consider that A thought that we should study ethics so that we can become better people, rather than ethics becoming an impractical and abstract field of study
What was the Greek word for virtue?
Arete was the Greek word for virtue, a more accurate translation could be ‘excellence’, ‘good quality’ or ‘good disposition’
What does the term virtue denote for A?
Denotes a striving towards fulfilling a certain intended purpose (final cause, prime mover we are all moving towards, eudaimonia).
What does A think motivates a good action?
The motivation for a good person’s action must be to produce a good action and to therefore create eudaimonia
How does Guthrie describe arete?
Guthrie describes arete as meaning ‘the quality of excellence toward which we strive in our daily conduct in society’
Why is VE teleological but not consequentialist or deontological?
VE is teleological but not deontological or consequentialist. Teleological but not consequentialist because teleological is to do with people but consequentialism is to do with actions. Similar to how natural moral law is both deontological and teleological but not consequential
What did A see goodness as?
A thought that ‘goodness’ consists in eudaimonia, in the same way that utilitarians see goodness as consisting in the maximisation of utility
What does eudaimonia mean?
While there is no precise English translation for the term, it may be roughly taken as ‘good living’ or ‘flourishing’
What did A think that all objects have?
A thought that every object had a function, something that it alone could do. For instance, the function of a knife is to cut things and the function of a net is to catch things. If everything has a particular function, what is the function of human beings? Do they have a special function for A?
What did A think separated us from everything else and what did he think this means we should do?
A thought that what separates us from everything else on the planet is our rationality. Our ultimate good is therefore to exercise our rational capacities in the pursuit of eudaimonia
What does Slote say about eudaimonia and why is this reflective of what A thought?
Slote describes how ‘eudaimonia is the idea that no trait of character can count as virtue unless it serves the interests and promotes the overall well-being of the virtuous individual. However, he stresses that it is ‘far from recommending that we would be selfishly or egoistically motivated.’ It is an individual state, but also involves social interaction – living in harmony and cooperation with others. A thought that living cooperatively with others was essential, since he saw humans as being social beings
Why is the idea of the polis important for understanding eudaimonia?
The polis is important here, because we can’t achieve eudaimonia unless everyone if flourishing, because we are social beings
Who promoted existentialism and what does it state?
Existentialism is the idea promoted by Jean-Paul Sartre that ‘existence precedes essence’
How can existentialism be seen as a counter to VE?
This was intended as a direct rebuke to thinkers like A who assumed the opposite – that each thing had a particular purpose that was somehow fundamental to it
Why does Sartre disagree with A’s ideas about purpose?
For Sartre, there are no grand plans or imbued functions – particularly for human beings. In fact, ‘man is thrown into the world’. Life in quite meaningless and it is for the individual alone to bring purpose to it
How is VE different from other ethical theories in terms of rules?
VE is unique among ethical theories since it does not try and offer hard and fast rules of morality, rather pointing out virtues that will make us more ethical beings. It is a matter of debate whether this lack of clear guidelines is a strength or a weakness
What do moral agents have to do to discover what is a virtue?
To work out what can be considered a virtue, A said moral agents need to find the mean or balance between two vices, with vices being the excess or deficiency of a virtue
Give a quote from A where he talks about the idea of the golden mean?
‘Virtue is a mean because vices respectively fall short of or exceed what is right in both passions and actions, while virtue finds and chooses that which is intermediate’
What do individuals need to use to discover the virtues?
To work this out, agents need to use phronesis (practical wisdom). This is an individual process of working out what virtue is suited to each situation. There can therefore be no rules or maxims about how to act (similar idea to SE). Individuals use their autonomy and intellect to work it out and then put it into practise
Why can it be said that A favours the idea of intrinsic goods over instrumental goods?
A says that human beings are able to work out for themselves what is good, which is different to what will produce good in a particular situation, but what will produce the good life in general. Here we can see A making a distinction between intrinsic and instrumental goods
Give a quote from A where he states his preference for the idea of intrinsic goods over instrumental goods
‘Now it is thought to be the mark of a man of practical wisdom to be able to deliberate well about what is good and expedient (practical) for himself, not just in some particular respect e.g. not about what sort of things will conduce to health or strength, but about what sort of things will conduce to the good life in general’
What two types of virtues did A distinguish between?
Intellectual and moral
Explain the idea of intellectual virtues and give an example
Developed by training yourself and being educated. For example, learning an instrument takes time commitment and sometimes sheer willpower. Not everyone can develop this – only the gentlemen philosophers. Contemporary applications see ‘gentlemen philsophers’ as being those people who have the resources available to do this. This links to the earlier quote about how everyone can develop the virtues, but not everyone will. An example could be wittiness
Explain the idea of moral virtues and give an example
Developed by practise and habit. For example, being compassionate for the less fortunate helps develop the moral virtue of compassion. Everyone can develop this. An example could be courage
What did A think was the only morally correct way to live?
A thought that the only morally correct way to live was to develop a virtuous character
How many people did A think could develop the virtuous character?
He thought that theoretically anyone could develop a virtuous character but in practise few would
How many virtues does A describe?
A describes 11 virtues, each with a vice of excess and a vice of deficiency
What did A compare the development of virtues to?
A compared developing virtues to learning to play an instrument, it takes repeated practise to hone and cultivate the virtues over time
How is VE different to utlitarianism?
No rules in VE, such as the principle of utility
List all 11 virtues
- Courage
- Temperance
- Generosity
- Magnificence
- Magnanimity (being a good sort)
- Pride
- Patience
- Truthfulness
- Wittiness
- Friendliness
- Modesty
- Righteous indignation
Give the vices for courage
Vice of excess – rashness
Vice of deficiency – cowardice
Give the vices for temperance
Vice of excess - licentiousness/self indulgence
Vice of deficiency - insensibility (being unable to enjoy anything)
Give the vices for generosity
Vice of excess - prodigality (reckless spending)
Vice of deficiency - miserliness
Give the vices for magnificence
Vice of excess – vulgarity
Vice of deficiency – pedantry
Give the vices for magnanamity
Vice of excess – vanity
Vice of deficiency – spinelessness
Give the vices for pride
Vice of excess – arrogance
Vice of deficiency – unambitiousness (a lack of self-respect)
Give the vices for patience
Vice of excess – irascibility (short tempered)
Vice of deficiency – lack of spirit
Give the vices for truthfulness
Vice of excess – boastfulness
Vice of deficiency – bashfulness (false modesty)
Give the vices for wittiness
Vice of excess – buffoonery
Vice of deficiency – humourlessness
Give the vices for friendliness
Vice of excess – obsequiousness (a door mat)
Vice of deficiency – moodiness
Give the vices for modesty
Vice of excess – shyness
Vice of deficiency – shamelessness
Why did enlightenment thinkers criticise VE?
By the 17th and 18 centuries it was seen as being too imprecise and was criticised for not applying itself to the absolutes of right and wrong (people preferred Kantian and utilitarian ethics)
Why did the 1950s and 60s see a resurgence in popularity for VE?
1950-60s society saw a declining amount of religious morality because less people went to church. Ideas therefore swung away from rules and towards values and qualities for the good life
How was VE revived in the 20th century?
The 20th saw a revival of VE with numerous scholars developing their own VE theories, with varying degrees of similarity to A’s theory
What was this revival in response to?
They responding to the prominence of deontological and consequentialist ethics and the fact that they see the need for a new kind of ethics that moves away from these traditions (agent centred rather than action centred
Why did Elizabeth Anscombe support VE?
Thought that other theories did not provide a foundation for moral guidelines as they rely on the idea of punishment or reward. In other words, ethics is heteronous when it should be autonomous. This links to the fact that VE is agent centred whereas other ethics are action centred. You can therefore use Anscombe to criticise all other ethics
Need to return to agent centred morality and the ideas of eudaimonia and the social aspects of morality that unite communities that is disregarded when we focus on heteronomous actions
Why did Phillipa Foot reject the non cognitivist emotivist theories popular amongst her Oxford colleagues?
rejected the non-cognitivism that was then fashionable among some of her Oxford colleagues (emotivism) after the atrocities of the Holocaust became clear following WWII
Why did she disagree with them?
She contended that the ethical concepts that the non-cognitivists usually attack (concepts such as ‘good’ and ‘bad’) were too narrow, and that their arguments were less successful when it came to weightier moral virtues which A had written about
How did she think humans could achieve good?
Foot eventually settled on the view that humans are naturally constituted to be good, but can only be so when they employ phronesis, which she saw as a kind of rational deliberation about what needs to be done in a given situatio
What was the overall impact of her works on VE?
The exact arguments for her position are complex and tied to the academic quarrels of the day, but her work helped rehabilitate VE, positioning it as a ‘third way’ between consequentialism and deontology
What did she attempt to do to VE?
Update it
What purposes did she see the virtues as serving?
Claimed that virtues were a way for people to flourish by correcting tendencies towards the vices
Why did she see the virtues as being necessary for humans?
Says that there is a human tendency to be selfish and this needs to be corrected by being compassionate and benevolent
What purpose does she see the idea of eudaimonia serving?
Virtues do not guarantee eudaimonia, but they do help in moving towards achieving it. Eudaimonia might be impossible to practically reach, but we should try our best
How did she attempt to update the virtues?
Virtues are only virtuous when used in the correct way to bring about a good outcome
What are the two main flaws in her attempts to update the virtues?
This begs the question of how we can determine what is a good outcome and what is the correct way. Fallen into the trap of making it action centred and consequential, taken away what is fundamental to VE
What does the term polis mean?
Polis is an Ancient Greek term that literally translate as city, but it can be taken more broadly to mean the community or government. It is the term from which our modern word ‘politics’ derives
Why did A see living in a harmonious community as being in line with human nature?
A famously declared that ‘man is by nature a political animal’. It is for this reason that he was concerned not only with the question of how we might best individually, but also how we might best live collectively
Give a quote from A where he talks about how following the virtues is the best way of living for individuals and societies
‘The best life, both for individuals and states, is the life of virtue’
Give a quote from A where he talks about how the needs of the community are more important than the needs of any one individual
‘For even if the end is the same for a single man and for a state, that of the state seems at all events something greater and more complete whether to attain or preserve; though it is worthwhile to attain the end merely for one man, it finer and more God-like to attain it for a nation or for city-states. These, then, are the ends at which our enquiry aims, since it is political science, in one sense of that term’
What is A saying in this quote?
Here, A reveals himself to be fundamentally at odds with modern conceptions about the role the state should have in our lives. So long as our actions do not harm anyone else, we are free to pursue whatever course of action we see fit (the harm principle), first explicitly outlined by Mill in ‘On Liberty’. However, for A, the polis, which means all the people who make up a community/state, should collectively aim to live virtuously
What would Alisdair MacIntyre think about this idea?
While his political ideas might sound strange now, there are those who argue that his ideas might be preferable to the liberal, individualistic society we have today. Chief among them is the contemporary Scottish philosopher MacIntyre, whose 1981 work ‘After Virtue’ bemoans the lack of any sense of moral value in the contemporary world
Why does he think it is so negative that we have no common moral principles in the modern world?
He argues that when we talk of things like ‘good’ and ‘bad’ and ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ today, we are using words whose original meaning and context has been long forgotten. These words may have made sense in a Christian or Ancient Greek society, but in a liberal society like are own they have no force, because we no longer have any shared moral principles. Ethical and political debates rage on but they will never reach a conclusion because each side refuses to accept the others’ basic assumptions
Why does he think that this is bad for how politics works?
In the absence of any meaningful notion of common good, M contends that our world leaders rule strictly according to their own, often ruthless, self-interest…
Give a quote from M that explains this
‘Politically the societies of advanced Western modernity are oligarchies disguised as liberal democracies. The large majority of those who inhabit them are excluded from membership of the elites that determine the range of alternatives between which voters are permitted to choose. And the most fundamental issues are excluded from the range of alternatives’
What does M therefore advocate for a return to?
It is for this reason that M advocates a return to communities. Not dissimilar to the Athenian democracy of A’s day, where members have a set of shared values and work towards not just the individual, but collective goodness. Ethical and political disputes can be solved in an environment like this because everyone has an understanding of what the good life is, and, just as importantly, is able to meaningfully to contribute to the debate
What is the irony of M advocating for a return for the type of community that A wrote about?
However, even in the system of Athenian democracy, only the elites could vote and meaningfully contribute to debate, which is exactly what M laments the contemporary political system for
Why does M take issue with contemporary conceptions of ethics?
Ethical theories only result in ethical disagreements
Most people’s attitudes today are based on emotivism and therefore meaningless
Morality should be seen in terms of human purpose
What did he think the virtues depended upon?
Human function and so human virtue depends on the community, as E is a societal concept
The shared practise of a community is what helps us cultivate the virtues
How is his conception of virtues more flexible?
Said that virtues evolve over time
Give a quote that explains this more flexible interpretation
‘Any virtues which sustain the households and communities in which men and women seek for good together’
Explain this quote
This means that you can have any virtues you want as long as they help create a harmonious society
What was Richard Taylor’s problem with the influence of religion on morality?
Outspoken about religious influence on morality
Thought we should aspire to E, but that religion opposes the idea
Religion doesn’t encourage followers to be better people. For example, ‘blesses are the meek for they shall inherit the Earth’ begs the question of why we should strive for excellence we we can just sit patiently and wait
Give an example of a historical Christian who would oppose these ideas
People like Iraneaus would say that religion does help you become better
What criticism of VE did Rosalind Hursthouse try to counter?
Counter-argued the criticism that VE does not provide guidance in ethical dilemmas
How did she try and counter this view?
Claims that VE doesn’t explain how a person should act, but how a virtuous person would think about the moral dilemma
Virtues assist our practical reasoning, enabling us to become better people
What is the main issue with her arguement?
Using our virtues will enable us to become virtuous people. This is an incredibly circular argument
What is the overall impact of her arguement on VE?
Weak argument but she does defend the fact that VE is supposed to be agent rather than action centred
What else can help us develop the virtues aside from using phronesis to find the golden mean?
As well as using the golden mean to learn how to live the virtuous life, another source of inspiration and information is the example virtuous people can provide
What is the benefit of using virtuous role models as an example
Examples can be a useful and practical way of learning how to be virtuous, as it is often easier to understand something when you see it in real life
Can provide inspiration and guidance in situations where difficult decisions need to be made
What should we make sure to remember when looking at virtuous role models?
This said, examples are not to be worshipped or idealised in any way, as nobody is perfect, and everyone has flaws
What should we do once we have found a suitable virtuous role model?
We should aim to imitate their behaviour so that we can become virtuous like them
Analyse the impact they have on ethical decision making
Not perfect but can challenge us to aspire to greater moral heights can become the best we possibly can be
List some of the virtues displayed by Jesus in his ministry
Righteous indignation at the temple cleansing
Showed wisdom in dealing with adulterous women
Showed great compassion towards those others rejected
Treated his disciples with great patience
What did St Paul say that draws a link between VE and Christianity?
St Paul says that when the holy spirit controls us we express the virtues
Make the case that JC is a virtuous role model
JC encouraged his disciples to continue his work
He has inspired many to live a life of devotion, which is what A thought a virtuous role model should be
Displayed the virtues listed above in his ministry
Why can the idea of virtuous role models be made more flexible?
You can adapt role models to the culture that you are in
Why does looking at virtuous role models perhaps not translate to improving our own ethical decision making?
Role models are not necessarily templates that we can copy, since we need to be flexible and recognise that virtue takes many different forms depending on the situation. This makes it hard to know when and how we should follow their example; if they are just an inspiration, this may not provide much in the way of practical advice. People are often virtuous in contexts that are different to your own, so it might be difficult to translate virtue into ways that can be acted upon in our own lives
How can the idea prove divisive?
People disagree about who is virtuous, so it might be hard to know who the right person to use an example is
How can the idea prove controversial in some instances?
Even terrible people can sometimes display a certain virtue very well through their actions, but it would seem wrong to look at them as a virtuous role model
Why are animals not included in the ethical sphere for A?
A thought that eudaimonia is restricted to humans. Rationality is a function unique to us, so living well for human beings is to live in accordance with reason. Living well will require to be virtuous, but the virtue only really applies to how we deal with other humans (being witty requires someone to hear your jokes). Animals are simply not in the picture
What ethical question does this beg?
Does this mean that we can treat animals as we wish?
How could a modern day virtue ethicist try and get around this issue?
A modern take on VE might say that the kind of character who starves or hurts animals is unlikely to be an example of a flourishing human being; outright cruelty to animals would suggest a character laden with vices
It is possible for a virtue ethicist to contrive an account of good living which involves a vegetarian or vegan lifestyle; perhaps not eating meat shows temperance or magnanimity
Other virtue ethicists have tried to ground the proper treatment of animals in terms of our relationship with them. Pet owners form strong bonds with their pets, so for them, being cruel to a pet is not really different to being cruel to a close family member
Why would many still consider this resolution to be problematic?
A defence of animal rights from utilitarian or deontological grounds would still find something amiss in this account, for they are being excluded from the ethical landscape, as the treatment of animals only matters because of what it shows about a person’s character for VE
Analyse the impact that war has on the striving towards E
One might wonder whether war can contribute to eudaimonia. On the one hand, it allows the virtues of courage, rightful indignation and temperance to develop, yet on the other, it is more often than not an occasion for lots of vices
What did A think about war?
A thought that ‘no one chooses to be at war, or provokes war, for the sake of being at war’, rather ‘we make war so that we might live in peace’. This is effectively a restatement of the principle of last resort
How does VE compare to the just war theory in terms of how it would approach war?
As ever in VE, there are no hard and fast principles, simply the assurance that the virtuous decision is the one that is right for the context. To this extent, it is somewhat at odds with the maxim based just war theory, although the virtuous individual would be likely to follow rules such as proportionality and last resort
List some of the advantages of VE
Unlike the teleological and deontological ethical theories, VE avoids the need for strict formulae or laws to work out what is morally right, as these approaches have been often seen as inflexible and rigid
Encourages people to be virtuous at all times and transform themselves to become a good person in general. This avoids the problem of other ethical theories being followed simply because people have been told to, or for heavenly reward, rather than out of a motive to be good
Provides practical ways to help develop virtues through the golden mean and examples of other virtuous people
Holistic theory that does not separate out moral dilemmas that require a formulaic response, but sees one’s whole life as morally relevant. Individuals can develop and practise virtues at any time. Many different aspects of life, including emotions, are integrated into the theory
It looks at what makes life worthwhile rather than just what is right or wrong in a particular context
Practical because it allows us to show preference to friends and family, which utilitarianism and Kant do not allow us to
Recognises human intellectual ability and autonomy to make decisions about which virtues, and in what way, should be shown in situations. It encourages moral agents to become good and allows individuals to develop an understanding of what is good, rather than simply acting in a way that they have been told is good
A’s virtues can be seen as consistent with Christianity because of the influence Greek thought had on Christianity
Based on what humans are actually like and the fact that we are imperfect
Appeals to both secular and religious morality. Atheist can aspire to be like JC without believing he was the SoG. JC is an inspiration to people of different faiths or no faiths. JC embodies lots of the virtues, like righteous indignation at the temple cleansing. Patient with doubting Thomas, sinners and unbelievers. The principles are also compatable with religious belief. They can compliment moral guidelines in religious texts, as the virtues are agent rather than action centred, so they won’t contradict action sent religious guidelines. Taylor counters this by saying that JC encourages weakness and mediocrity, as virtues are about finding a mean where as JC arguably commits the vice of deficiency
VE doesn’t have a set of rules. Focuses on becoming a better person and providing a way for humans to develop into what they ought to be. Avoids the inequalities that absolutist ethical sytems cause and the dubious morality of actions that relativism can justify
Logical as it focuses on phronesis and traits that help society prosper
Weaknesses
Can struggle to provide clear guidance on poignant moral issues today, like abortion, gay marriage and stem cell research. It is hard to see how applying virtues or practical wisdom can provide insight on such complex issues
Secular theory and so not fitting in with Christian views, especially their view that humanity is fallen and unable to achieve the perfect state that A suggests
Virtues can be good externally be unvirtuous in motive – although Slote responds to this problem by emphasising the importance of good motive
There is no room for rights and obligations, particularly the ideas of human rights that have become important today
The golden mean has been abandoned in more recent theory because if its inability to incorporate human rights, as well as virtues that are considered to have an excess – such as truthfulness – as many think that you cannot be too honest. The golden mean also has problems in helping us to identify easily the deficit and excess of certain virtues
Owen Flanagan has commented on the difficulties of having examples of virtuous people. He argues that there is not just one type of moral or virtuous person. He argues that ‘the possibilities for moral excellence are as unlimited as both the individual is complex and as human experience is original’. He uses the example of many different kinds of saint in Christianity to demonstrate this. He suggests that instead of trying to copy moral examples, individuals should develop virtue in their own unique way
Even bad people can possess virtues, so anyone could therefore be a role model (this is a problem with A’s VE)
Some people criticise A’s virtues as being too masculine. MacIntyre solves this by saying you can have your own virtues
Wolfe claims that everyone is virtuous then there will be no variety or excitement in the world. Need negative traits so that we can admire the positive ones. If all are virtuous, there could be a sense of apathy or boredom. SL to Irenean Theodicy
Some virtues can be used incorrectly to perform immoral actions. Certain people believe specific values are actually immoral. If you belived Iraq was unjust, can the actions of courageous soldiers fighting there be seen as developing a virtue by doing something immoral. The counter to this is that she is making VE action centred
Very difficult to apply to moral problems because it doesn’t provide a method for knowing what to do, except to be virtuous, Provides no answers, but encourages us to focus on phronesis and wisdom given to us by the virtues to know what we ought to be doing – vague. Doesn’t tell you what to do, but how to think
Teachings of the virtues focus on masculine rather than feminine virtues. M counters this by saying you could make you own virtues as long as they serve your community
At what point does a virtue become a vice. Is there a definitive point or is it subjective? A says it is not a fixed point and depends on the situation – vague. Subjective and lacks precision
Virtues clash, which is more important in each situation?
Some actions are so intolerable that they must be wrong
Grayling says that the focus on the middle way is middle aged, middlebrow and middle class
We could argue that A is making a circular argument…
How do we know what a virtuous person is?
Because they possess the virtues
How do we know what the virtues are?
Because they are those characteristics possessed by virtuous people
But this then brings back the question of how we can know what a virtuous person is
In other words, virtue is whatever virtue does; but virtue does whatever virtue is
This is clearly circular, how can we know that a person is virtuous if we don’t already know what the virtuous acts are. How can we know what the virtuous acts are if we don’t already know who the virtuous people are
According to Nietzsche’s writings about morality, what will all forms of morality, including VE, inevitably be?
Culturally relative
What would this suggest that VE amounts to?
One criticism of VE is that it is inevitably culturally relative. This theory suggests that VE just amounts to a prolonged description of those personal characteristics that the Ancient Greek nobility found admirable or distasteful
Likewise, the modern virtue ethics of Anscombe and MacIntyre lists those characteristics that mid-20th century British philosophers found admirable or distasteful
Why is this so ironic for the modern resurgence of VE?
This is ironic when we consider that the 20th century philosophers that revived VE were attempting to rebel against relativism, which they felt was leading the world into a moral abyss
Describe N’s theories about how all morality is relative?
This line of thought finds its most powerful expression in German writer and philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, who argued that one of the great mistakes of Western philosophy was to assume that morality could be discussed in a vacuum. For Nietzche, morality has a history. This is a story behind why one kind of person or action can be considered good, and another kind is considered bad
In what work did he most clearly lay this out?
‘Genealogy of Morality’
Describe the differences in morality within A and N’s culture
while ancient Greeks praised courage, strength and conquest, N’s society, heavily influenced by Christianity, praised meekness, self-denial and frugality
What question does this beg?
If morality can differ so widely through time and place, why should we revere the claims to ethical truth made by one thinker at one time in one place?
What did N say was happening to ethics at the time that he wrote?
He makes the conclusion that any objective morality is bound to fail. He considered himself to be living in an age where the entire façade of ethics was beginning to collapse, and that its replacement would be a world without values
Counter N’s viewpoint
In defence of VE, and normative ethics more generally, ideas should be judged not on their origins but on their merit. To argue otherwise is to commit the genetic fallacy; this is an argumentative mistake where an idea is rejected out of hand because of who said it or where it originated. Just because A praised those characteristics he found personally admirable, it does not mean that they are not objectively good. The reasons why honesty and courage are valued from place to place might be different, but they are valued nonetheless
Evaluate the impact N’s ideas have on ethics
N gives us reason to radically question received opinion, but we do not need to throw away ethics altogether
