Virtue Ethics (Aristotle) Flashcards
The good as happiness/flourishing (Eudaimonia)
- That is the only thing that is done for its own sake, never because of something else
- That is the thing for the sake of which all other things are done
Characteristic activity
- can’t be living, plants do that
- can’t be sentient life, animals have that
- has to be “activity of the soul in accordance with reason or at least not entirely lacking it”
Virtuous action
1, Knowledge
- Rational choice
- Does those actions from a firm and unshakable character
Knows that he is doing virtuous actions
Knowledge
Decides to act the way, and decides on that acts for its own sake
Rational choice
Does those actions from a firm and unshakable character?
Rational choice and unshakable character are more important than knowledge, and they result from doing the right kinds of actions frequently
Habituation
- By nature, we have the ability to acquire virtues
Teachers/exemplars
- Learning virtue is like learning a craft, we learn it by producing the same product over and over again
- We reach our complete perfection through developing habits of behaviour
- However, habits of virtue can be developed badly, so we need teachers or exemplars to guide us in the right way to develop the habit
- The teachers of virtue should be those that are themselves identified as being virtuous
Identifying virtues
- Actions are called virtuous when they are the sort that a virtuous person would do
- A person comes to be virtuous from doing virtuous actions
- Virtue is a state, not a feeling or capacity
the mean requires having the right feelings at the right times, about the right things, toward the right people, for the right end, and in the right way
excess and deficiency in feelings and actions are an error and incur blame (vice); vice of excess, vice of deficiency
the intermediate is correct (virtue)
It is much easier to get it wrong than to be correct, because there are many ways to be in error but only one way to be correct
Not every action or feeling has a mean, there are some things that automatically are based on
Doctrine of the mean
Not every action or feeling has a mean, there are some things that automatically are base
- spite, shamelessness, envy, adultery, theft, murder are always an error
Specific virtues and vices
- Giving and taking money
- Honor and dishonor
- Anger
- Fear and confidence
Giving and taking money
- Mean: generosity
- Excess: wastefulness
- Deficiency: ungenerosity (greed)
Honor and dishonor
- Mean: magnanimity
- Excess: vanity
- Deficiency: pusillanimity
Anger
- Mean: mildness
- Excess: irascibility
- Deficiency: inirascibility
Fear and confidence
- Mean: bravery
- Excess: nameless/rash
- Deficiency: cowardly
- The right feeling: Fear is the expectation of something bad, and we fear all bad things
- About the right thing, at the right time: One is brave to the fullest extent if they are facing a fine death and the immediate dangers that bring death- above all in war
- In the right way: A brave person will be unperturbed as far as a person can be
- Error (rashness, or cowardice) is fearing the wrong thing, in the wrong way, at the wrong time
Bravery
One can only be praised or blame for an action that is voluntary
Voluntary action
Involuntary action
Some actions are a mix of voluntary and involuntary
Praise and Blame
Has its cause in the agent himself, when he knows the particulars that the action consists in
Voluntary action
Actions from one of two cases
Involuntary action
Forced action
Ignorant action
Involuntary action
the result of an external cause, to which the agent or victim contributes nothing
Forced action
The result of ignorance about the particulars of the action
Ignorant action
Ignorant action: the result of ignorance about the particulars of the action
1) who is doing it
2) what he is doing
3) about what or to what he is doing it
4) sometimes also what he is doing with it…
5) for what result…
6) in what way
Three dichotomies of female ethics
- Reasons vs. emotions, with emotion devalued
- Public vs. private, with women relegated to the private
- The individual self vs. relational self, with the self constructed from the male point of view as autonomous
In the history of philosophy the man of reason has been a crucial figure
Two versions of reason based accounts: Kantian and Utilitarian
Reason vs. Emotion
In the history of philosophy the man of reason has been a crucial figure:
Reason was thought to control emotion in order to guide responsible human action
Two versions of reason based accounts: Kantian and Utilitarian
- Both rely on abstract, universal principle to guide morality
- Both apply abstract principles to particular cases to solve moral problems
- Both share admiration for rules of reason, and denigrate emotional responses
Feminist Rethinking of Reason and Emotion
- Question whether relying on abstract rules and rationality is enough
- Women’s experiences lead to special concern with actual relationships between embodied persons, and the context they are in
- Ethics needs to re-evaluate the role of emotion
Women’s experiences lead to special concern with actual relationships between embodied persons, and the context they are in
- Feelings, such as empathy and caring, suggest what we ought to do
- There are specific moral responsibilities that stem from particular relationships
- Some psychologists (Carol Gilligan) argue there is data to support this as well
Ethics needs to re-evaluate the role of emotion
- Morality requires desirable forms of moral emotion (not just reason and rational control)
- Emotion should be respected rather than dismissed when gaining moral understanding
Morality requires desirable forms of moral emotion (not just reason and rational control)
Emotion should be respected rather than dismissed when gaining moral understanding
- Can help to understand caring relations, which are central to feminist morality
- Can help decide between trade offs and make difficult moral decisions
Reason was thought to control emotion in order to guide responsible human action
- Scientific and moral knowledge is male knowledge
- Man of reason is a rejection of the feminine, women seen as weak and unreasonable
- Public vs. private
- Historically, what is uniquely human was viewed as male
- Morality was seen to be in the public domain, beyond the natural behaviour of women in the private sphere of the home
- Feminists criticize the distinction between the public and private, and the idea that what is “private” is natural and outside of politics
Historically, what is uniquely human was viewed as male
- Men are engaged in history and civilization, what takes humans beyond the animal
- Women are natural, material, biological and more animalistic
Feminists criticize the distinction between the public and private, and the idea that what is “private” is natural and outside of politics
- The personal is political, so this dichotomy needs to be reconsidered
Men are engaged in history and civilization, what takes humans beyond the animal
Women are natural, material, biological and more animalistic
- Reproduces life, and provides for the natural needs of man in the home
- Primarily mothers, and mothering is a biological function that all animals do
- Feminist rethinking of the private and public
- Need to rethink the roles historically given to men and women
- Example: Mothering
- Morality should focus on idealized versions of norms and practices from the private sphere
Example: Mothering
- Humans do it very differently than non-human animals
- Reshapes language and culture, forms social personhood, develops morality, involves creativity
- Specific activities like nursing and eating are more than biological, they are determined by social, political and cultural factors and can be transformative
Morality should focus on idealized versions of norms and practices from the private sphere
- Trust, care, friendship, love, empathy, sibling relations, parenting, etc should be used wherever appropriate
- Flourishing of children should be the center of moral, social, economic, political, and legal structures
- Individual Self vs. Relational Self
- Historically, ethics has mostly used atomistic, individualistic theories of the self
- From the point of view of women’s experience, this is not even believable in theory, and it is misleading
Historically, ethics has mostly used atomistic, individualistic theories of the self
- Imagined men as if they were “not born of, much less nurtured by, women, or anyone else”
- This influenced both concepts of gender and philosophical concepts such as morality
From the point of view of women’s experience, this is not even believable in theory, and it is misleading
- It distorts the experiences and aspirations of men as well as women
- We need to rethink moral concepts in light of this
3, Feminist Rethinking of the individual vs, Relational Self
- Recognize that the self is always shaped to an important degree by relations with other people
- We need a relationship view of the self
Recognize that the self is always shaped to an important degree by relations with other people
- Those relations are often much more significant your individual, isolated interests
- As persons we always have ties to other persons and are at least partly constituted by those ties as part of who we inherently are
- The “view from nowhere”, complete abstract and impartial, is impossible
We need a relational view of the self
- Attention to the particulars of each relationship
- Understanding and evaluating those relationships
- Focusing morality on making those relationships the best version they can be, guiding, maintaining and reshaping them
The advantages of not losing sight of the work involved in caring for people and of not lending itself to the interpretation of morality as ideal but impractical to which advocated of the ethics of care often object.
Care Ethics
Three elements of the ethics of care
- Dependence and Need
- Valuing Emotion
- Particulars, not Abstract Universals
- Dependence and Need
The central focus is one the moral importance of the needs of particular others we take responsibility for
- Recognizes that human beings are dependent for many years of their lives
- Moral claims of those who depend on us for care are pressing, and attention to them is needed
- This is missing in most dominant moral theories that focus on independent, autonomous, rational individuals
- The central focus is one the moral importance of the needs of particular others we take responsibility for
Example: caring for one’s child can defensibly be a primary moral concern
Recognizes that human beings are dependent for many years of their lives
- Examples: Babies, illness, injury, disability, old age
Moral claims of those who depend on us for care are pressing, and attention to them is needed
- The flourishing and progress of the human species relies on those who need care receiving that care
- Responsibility to the needs of the dependent has a moral force that cannot be ignored
- Valuing Emotion
- Dominant moral theories that rely entirely on reason and rationalistic deductions or calculations (like Utilitarianism or Kantian ethics) are missing something important
- Care ethics argues that understanding what is morally best requires valuing emotion, not rejecting it
- Does not mean we must value all emotions automatically
- Moral theories that focus on reason (Utilitarianism and kantianism) typically consider and reject egoistic emotions
- Ethics of care focuses on emotions and relational capabilities that help morally concerned persons in actual interpersonal contexts to understand what would be the best thing to do
Care ethics argues that understanding what is morally best requires valuing emotion, not rejecting it
- Moral emotions such as sympathy, empathy, sensitivity, and responsiveness need to be cultivated
- Moral emotions help us to implement what reason tells us to do
- Moral emotions can also help us determine what needs to be done, morally
Moral emotions such as sympathy, empathy, sensitivity, responsiveness need to be cultivated
- Even anger can be a moral emotion
Does not mean we must value all emotions automatically
- Not raw emotion alone, but feelings that are reflected on and educated
Moral theories that focus on reason (Utilitarianism and kantianism) typically consider and reject egoistic emotions
- Feelings like favouritism, aggression, revision, and self-interest that undermine universal moral norms, impartiality, and the purpose of morality
Ethics of care focuses on emotions and relational capabilities that help morally concerned persons in actual interpersonal contexts to understand what would be the best thing to do
- Recognizes that even helpful emotions can become misguided or do harm
- We need an ethics of care, not just care itself
- Aspects and expressions of care and caring relations need to be subjected to moral scrutiny and evaluated, not just observed and described
- Particulars, not Abstract Universals
- Dominant view argues the abstract reasoning is more likely to avoid bias and arbitrariness
- The ethics of care focuses on the claims of particular others in actual relationships
Dominant view argues the abstract reasoning is more likely to avoid bias and arbitrariness
- Treat moral problems as conflicts between egoistic self interest and universal moral principles, missing the middle ground
The ethics of care focuses on the claims of particular others in actual relationships
- Need to limit universal rules to certain domains where they are appropriate (such as law), and resist their extension into other domains (such as family and friendships)
- Morality should be able to give guidance about relations that are trusting, considerate, and caring (and those that are not)
- Instead of individuals, or universals, need to look at the well-being of relationships themselves and the cooperative well-being of those in them together
Held’s answer to the question “What is care?”
Care is both a practice and a value
Care as a practice and activity
- Shows us how to respond to needs and why we should
- Builds trust and mutual concern and connectedness between persons, develops appropriate attitudes
- Has attributes and standards that can be described, recommended and continually improved
- Should express the caring relations that bring persons together in ways that are increasingly morally satisfactory, and transform people in increasingly morally admirable ways
Care as a value
- Caring persons and caring attitudes should be valued, and there are many moral considerations associated with care or its absence that can be used to evaluate persons
- Caring is a social relation, not an individual disposition or state like benevolence
Caring is a social relation, not an individual disposition or state like benevolence
- Ought to be cultivated both in personal lives and between members of a society as such, and should over the course of the relation be reciprocal
