The weakness of Virtue Ethics outweighs its strengths – Discuss. Virtue ethics is the ethics of us as persons and argues that morality is not about duties. There are a number of arguments for and against virtue ethics, and most for, argue for the formation and growth of us via phronesis or practical wisdom, which allows us to make the right decisions by using our conscience. Virtue ethics is mainly supported by Aristotle. It is based on different virtues that a person should have, so that they can then reach Euadamonia.
I may have an inclination for an object as the effect of my proposed action, but I cannot have respect for it, just for this reason, that it is an effect and not an energy of will. ” What you do out of duty does not include inclinations. Your good will cannot be judged by what you do, but why you did what you did. Inclinations are not respected, only acting out of duty can be respected. c) “Categorical Imperative: Those actions are right that conform to principles one can consistently will to be principles for everyone, and those actions wrong that are based on maxims that a rational creature could not will that all persons should follow” Kant says that an act is only right or moral if it is right for everyone.
Kant says that in doing the right action, it all matters with the altitude towards the action. The act does not qualify to be good by acting in a particular way just because one thinks it is good. Kant believes that the only good thing that does not require qualifications is a ‘good will’. Acts do not account for a good will if at all an individual is inclined to perform the task for some rewards or pleasure.
Kantian ethics is a poor theory. Discuss (10 marks) Kantian ethics can be seen as poor theory as it has its weaknesses. Every situation is unique, universal laws aren’t helpful in the real world where every situation is different. If no two situations are the same, morality should be relativist rather than absolutist. Another weakness is the consequences, in some situations when consequences are too severe that many think it is better to break a rule than allow awful thing to happen.
The Distinction of Virtue Ethics from other normative ethical theories In this essay, I will focus on a particular trait of Virtue ethics, which is “it has No Rules, or Too General Rules”. I will argue that this trait is the one of the main distinctions among other theories, and that this feature is an advantage to the theory. Virtue ethics is a normative theory where in the west, has its roots from the ancient work of Aristotle. The theory puts a strong emphasis on virtues and/or moral character, explaining that ethical behavior of a person is strongly related to the role and virtues of his/her character, in contrast the ways of deontology and consequentialism. Where in deontology the emphasis is on duties or rules, and in consequentialism it focuses on the concequences of one’s actions.
According to Superson, in order for self-interest to successfully defeat the skeptic it must defeat both action and disposition skepticism, which is where it lacks. It is unable to show that for every (ordinary) person, acting morally will always be in that person’s self-interest. There are also immoral acts other than self-interested ones that are at least as much in opposition to morality. A successful defeat must show that all immoral acts are irrational. Superson’s goal is to defeat the skeptic and does not believe self-interest is sufficient enough to do so.
However, it is not only about lack of time. Wolf argues that there is a category of qualities, which moral saint cannot hold, simply because they go against nature of moral saintliness. These qualities are, for example, sense of humour, irony or sarcasm. Generally, these character traits are thought to be the ones which help people better understand the world, its flaws and vices. However, moral saint does not and cannot hold them.
Socrates in Crito refutes this idea of the importance of a good reputation and honor. In response to Crito’s statement inquiring what could be worse than a bad reputation, Socrates declares, “what matters to us what the many think?” (534). Socrates goes on to say that the public’s opinion has no effect on a person’s true character. He asserts that, “they do things quite at random” (534). The position of wisdom being imperative in the pursuit of the
‘Virtue theory is an effective approach to making moral decisions’ Virtue ethics is a person centred approach unlike other ethical theories that are deontological or teleological ethical approaches. Virtue theory is not concerned with absolute rules or with outcomes of actions but is concerned with the moral agent, the person making the moral decision. The term ‘virtue’ can be translated to ‘arete’ in Greek, which means excellence. A virtuous person then is one who does things excellently all the time, for example a knife has excellence when it cuts sharply. (Arete is not only about people.)
It focus less in any particular instance and instead ruminate what a decision to tell a lie or not tell a lie said about one's character and moral behavior. As such, lying would be made in a case-by-case basis that would be based on factors such as personal benefit, group benefit, and intentions. Virtue-based ethical theory is not actually in conflict with deontology or teleology: those two viewpoints deal with which actions a person should take in any given scenario, whereas virtue theorists simply argue that developing morally desirable virtues for their own sake will help aid moral actions when such decisions need to be made. Aristotle categorized the virtues as moral and intellectual. Aristotle identified some intellectual virtues, the most important of which was wisdom; Sophia (theoretical wisdom) and phronesis (practical wisdom).