Virtue Ethics Flashcards
What are the criteria Aristotle says is needed for identifying what ‘the good’ is.
For Aristotle, there is some sort of good, which all humans strive for; an ultimate goal which everyone is aiming towards. For Aristotle, there is 5 criteria needed for identifying what ‘the good’ is:
- It must be an end
- It must be the final end
- It must be self-sufficient
- It must be related to us as human beings
- It must be a like which we all want.
What is virtue ethics? (general theory)
Virtue ethics differs from the approach of consequentialist and deontological theories in two main ways. Firstly, virtue ethics focuses on the character who commits the act—this part contains the moral weight. Secondly, for a virtue ethicist, it is difficult to offer simple rules and guidelines about how to live. This does not mean to say that Kant is not concerned with character motive or that virtue ethics is not concerned with rules at all.
For Aristotle, there is some sort of good, which all humans strive for; an ultimate goal which everyone is aiming towards. For Aristotle, there is 5 criteria needed for identifying what ‘the good’ is:
1. It must be an end
2. It must be the final end
3. It must be self-sufficient
4. It must be related to us as human beings
5. It must be a like which we all want
Aristotle further explains why there is a difference between Eudaimonia and happiness. Eudaimonia literally translates to good spirit. It is not the same as the psychological version of happiness. Eudaimonia is much more measurable in an objective sense. Aristotle believes humans are striving for eudaimonia not happiness.
Aristotle immediately dismisses pleasure, wealth, honour and goodness as candidates for eudaimonia for a combination of different reasons, but largely because they do not satisfy the rules set out above.
Aristotle uses the function argument in order to support his claim that we would understand what eudaimonia is if we understood our function as human beings. He believed that everything in the universe had a goal, purpose and end (teleological). The aim of Aristotle’s function argument is too show that:
• The good for us consists in us fulfilling our function well
• To show that human beings do actually have a function
• To say precisely what this function is
Aristotle basically says that what makes an X a good X is that it fulfils its function. He presents two arguments which are meant to demonstrate that humans do have a function. Each come with criticisms.
1. People with different occupations have a function, so it is unlikely that human beings would not have a function.
R: Aristotle seems to have collected a small number of random things and assumed from this that humans have a function. It is not made clear that the function of a human is linked to occupations in any way whatsoever.
2. Parts of a human body all have a function, so we should assume that a human being as a whole must also have one
R: Aristotle is guilty of the fallacy of composition here. Just because the parts of our body share a common feature, this does not mean the body as a whole has that common feature.
Furthermore, Aristotle thought that humans had a specific characteristic that singled them out from anything else. He thought that this characteristic was being able to reason. He thought that the characteristic must only be possessed by humans. The function of man is an activity of the soul which follows or implies a rational principle.
Outline and explain Aristotle’s function argument.
P1: Everything which exists has a function (this is the teleological assumption)
IC1: Therefore humans must have a function
P2: Our function is our characteristic activity
P3: We share other characteristics with plants and animals, but as well as sharing these, we also are unique in having a rational element in our souls
P4: Our characteristic activity, must be based on what is unique to us. This is to exercise the rational soul.
IC2: Therefore, human beings function is to exercise the rational part of the soul.
P5: A good X is one which exercises the excellences which are characteristic of X-ness (virtues) C: Therefore, to be a good person requires living a life in which the excellences of character are developed through the exercising of the rational soul.
For Aristotle, a virtue is excelling in the rational part of the soul. Furthermore, he says ‘one swallow does not make a spring’— this shows that human flourishing takes a lifetime of virtuous acts, not one single event. He also claims we need ‘external goods’ in order to live a good life. By this he means that it is much easier for people to flourish if they live in a comfortable, safe society. External goods may be down to good luck, but if we do not exercise rationality, we will not flourish even with an abundance of external goods.
What is ethica arête?
Ethica arete is basically a moral character referring to excellence or virtue. It is something to be aspired too. For Aristotle, to achieve ethica arete you must not just do good acts, but must also do them in a certain way. Ethica arete gives us desire, emotion and goals. It is a settled state which is relative to the individual depending on their circumstances. This state of mind is determined by reason.
What is the doctrine of the mean?
The aim of Aristotle’s Doctrine of the Mean is to show how we can attain an excellence of character.
Aristotle says that it is in the nature of something to be destroyed in excess or deficiency. Take health for example, it is destroyed in excess (over-eating) and also in deficiency (under-eating). To avoid either of these, we aim for the intermediate—the mean which lies in between both excess and deficiency. This rule applies equally to our character as it does to our body.
‘Temperance and courage are destroyed in excess and deficiency and are preserved by the mean’—Aristotle
Take the above statement as an example. It is important to have temperance in order to control our desires and stop us overindulging. It is also wrong do not follow our desires to a certain extent. Temperance is the virtue which lies between the excess licentiousness and the deficiency of insensibility; it is the mean. The same is true for courage. It is a desirable virtue as it is the mean between rashness and cowardice.
Aristotle’s doctrine of the mean is important as it answers critics and gives practical advice on how to act in any situation. It also has the benefit of fitting with our intuition of what virtues are.
Give a criticism and response to the doctrine of the mean.
Criticism of the doctrine of the mean: Sometimes a moderate response isn’t appropriate. It is absurd to consider that the moderate response is always appropriate when excellence of character is shaped by exercising rationality. Applying the doctrine to a few simple ideas is fine, but it is not true that it is always right to act moderately in every case.
Response: ‘Virtue discovers the mean and chooses it’. Take for example the amount of protein eaten. The mean is dependant on several factors and different for different people. The Rock will need to eat much more protein than I do. It doesn’t mean the amount which he eats is wrong. If both The Rock and I ate the same amount, one of us would not get the right amount—the mean is relative to the situation.
Give one strength and one weakness of virtue ethics.
Strengths
If we want to be happy then we must develop our emotional skill set. This is basically emotional intelligence, and the doctrine of the mean encourages this. It is applicable in situations and can be improved by practise. The theory seems to fit with how morality out to be.
Weaknesses
Aristotle point out that some emotions and some actions are always wrong (eg murder and theft). However, this admission chips away at the universality of the doctrine of the mean.
