To what extent do modern versions of
V.E address the weaknesses of
Aristotle's teaching on virtue?
Descripción
Mapa Mental sobre To what extent do modern versions of
V.E address the weaknesses of
Aristotle's teaching on virtue?, creado por Lana Buckland el 12/02/2014.
To what extent do modern
versions of V.E address the
weaknesses of Aristotle's
teaching on virtue?
1) explain virtue ethics from Aristotle and more modern
approaches
could contrast virtue ethics with another
ethical theory that you feel may give a
better outcome
rejected action-based ethics. He said that
an action may seem good but have a bad
motive - this is the exact opposite of the
utilitarian view, which argues that motive is
irrelevant.
Utilitarians and deontologists believe the right behaviour comes
BEFORE right behaviour, Aristotle believed you have to have the
right character in order to choose the right action
argued we can learn to be virtuous by
following virtuous people e.g. Jesus, Gandhi or
Sophie ;)
Virtue ethics doesn't question how we act but who we are as
people. It is agent-centred and seeks to find goodness by enriching
the individual
Aristotle’s idea of Virtue Ethics was
influenced by his belief that all things and
all humans have a purpose (a telos).
our purpose is to reach the ultimate happiness we
all aim for - eudaimonia. In order to reach
eudaimonia, Aristotle stated, we must be virtuous
people.
2) Explain the concept of eudaimonia, the Golden Mean
and the difference between the intellectual and the moral
virtues
Assess whether eudaimonia is important to
humanity.
According to Aristole reaching eudaimonia is important to
humanity because it enables a healthy society as virtues are
needed for it, which in turn is good for humanity.
A ‘’virtue’’ are qualities that lead to a good life
e.g. courage and honesty. Aristotle explains for
a person to adopt these qualities into their own
lives is to maximise their potential to achieve a
happy life and he goes on to explain
Eudaimonia as being a quality of this
happiness.
According to Aristotle,there are two types of virtue
Intellectual virtues: things which can be taught and
developed through teaching e.g wisdom or restraint
Moral virtues: qualities of
character - they can't be "taught"
and come through habit and
experience
Moral virtues are exemplified by courage, temperance,
and liberality - someone may find it difficult to become
couragous if they have not aquired the habit of acting
couragously
These virtues work together, and it would not be enough to
have one of these alone. Temperance and courage are moral
virtues - we get into the habit of acting bravely. We learn
self-control by practicing restraint.
The Golden Mean
In terms of working out a virtue, Aristotle
highlighted the importance of finding a
"golden mean" in qualities of character
All virtues have 2 vices or extremes
vice of deficiency e.g. cowardice
GOLDEN MEAN (virtue) - bravery
vice of excess e.g. foolishness
In the middle lies VIRTUE
Having either vices do not benefit society
Criticism: surely some jobs require certain vices? Vices lead us to have more interesting people and
encourages debate. If we all stick to certain virtues, won't we all be the same?
3) Explain why virtue ethics was
revived in the 20th century, and
explain the ideas of scholars such as
Anscombe, Foot, MacIntyre,
Hursthouse, Slote, etc.
revival is frequently traced to
Anscombe
argues that duty-based conceptions of morality are incoherent because they are based on the idea
of a law but without a lawgiver. She said "How can there be any moral laws if there is no God?"
recommends a return to the virtue ethical theories of the ancients, particularly Aristotle which ground
morality in eudaimonia
said human flourishing doesn't require a god
Argues that ethical codes which lay a stress on moral absolutes and
laws are useless in a society which has effectively abandoned God
Wisdom is a virtue
on both intellectual
and moral grounds
Contrary to Aristotle, Foot believes wisdom is
achievable by anyone who wants to (Aristotle
claims that a person who does not have a
formal education can never reach true morality)
Foot believes – against Aristotle – that
wisdom does not depend on social status,
political power, or intellectual power
Foot argues against Aristotle's idea that there should never
be a moral dilemma if you are virtuous and that it is more
moral if a person overcomes a dilemma to be virtuous
HOWEVER. Foot counters a popular criticism that virtues may be used to a bad end (that isn't eudaimonia) e.g. bravery to fight for Hitler.
Foot stated that this is wrong seeing as a virtue is only virtuous if used to the right end
Foot has been critcised for assuming all people work towards similar goals when this is simply not true.
Foot argued with Aristotle's view that
you can only be virtuous if you develop
and want to be, saying that, like Kant,
doing something out of duty increases
the moral worth of the act
In modern times, scholars have criticised Aristotle's
Virtue ethics for being too relative, vague and
self-centered. Many modern thinkers have written their
own theories of virtue ethics to try and address some of
the issues
4) discuss the fact that virtues can seem to
be culturally relative and so virtue ethics
is difficult to apply to ethical dilemmas
discuss if virtue ethics is actually
worth considering to address issues in
today’s world.
Plato would agree because being virtuous
allows you to possess traits to better
yourself and help improve society. The most
important virtue nowadays is reason which
we need in today's world.
Hursthouse addressed the
criticism that virtue ethics does not
provide moral guidance in dilemmas
Although virtue ethics doesn't explain how a person
should or would act, it does explain how a virtuous
person would think about the moral dilemma
Virtues assist practical reasoning,
enabling us to become better and
hence, respond to moral dilemmas in a
virtuous way