How far is virtue ethics a satisfactory guide to moral behaviour? Virtue ethics is person rather than action based as it looks at the virtue or moral character of the person carrying out an action, rather than at ethical duties and rules, or the consequences of particular actions, unlike Utilitarianism or Situation ethics, which always look at the consequence of the action. Virtue Ethics was a theory first developed by Aristotle (384 BC – 322 BC), Eudaimonia, or 'happiness', is the supreme goal of human life. Aristotle believed that everything has a purpose, Eudaimonia is the purpose for humans. Aristotle draws a distinction between superior and subordinate aims, believing Eudaimonia' is the end goal or purpose behind everything we do as people, and is desired for its own sake and therefore a superior aim.
He also connected Virtue Ethics with life lived according to human reason. Aristotle upheld that the vicious or callous are characters who fail to exercise reason, the supreme human capacity. Aristotle wrote “happiness depends
“What is the highest of all goods? It is happiness.” The great Greek philosopher Aristotle developed the normative ethical theory of Virtue Ethics and here argues that happiness is the highest good and what we should all strive to achieve. This theory focuses on the kind of person we should become rather than the actions we should do or avoid and is therefore aretaic. Aretai’ from the Greek essentially means virtue, and this is the heart of Virtue Ethics; that people should concentrate on practicing excellence and being virtuous in order to reach happiness, which is the highest goodness according to Aristotle. Morality is not simply about avoiding the wrong, but is also about doing what is virtuous.
Therefore, deontologists follow the belief that certain actions are inherently good if they follow the stated rules even if the action has bad consequences, it can still be defined as moral. In contrast, teleological ethical systems focus completely on the outcomes and consequences of an act. Teleology is a theory of ethics according to which the rightness of an act is determined by it's end. Also known as consequentialism, actions that result in what can be considered as a good consequence must be good and so the end result will justify the reason that the act was committed in the first place. Both deontological and teleological ethical systems use opposing ethical guides yet they both have the same aim, to help people make moral decisions.
NML is seen as objectively ideal, it is something that everyone should strive for as it is an objective truth which ties in with Moral Realism, this means there are objective truths, things that we should do/should not do because they are definitely right or wrong. This then ties in with a priori ethics, which means our ethical knowledge has nothing to do with our experience or influences, it is just knowable in the universe, we just know it, this is what NML is seen as, we do not learn it, we just know it. Aquinas was very influenced by Aristotle especially his view that everything has a purpose and these purposes can be understood through looking at the natural world and through the bible which reveals the purpose for which God created man. St Paul said the moral law of God is evident from the nature of man and the world, ‘Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible nature, namely, his external power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made’, Aquinas said God gave man reason to accomplish the purposes NML whether we believe in him or not. All humans can understand and follow NML but only the believers in God know that if they do, it will be beneficial for them beyond the
In the platonic theory of Forms, there is a hierarchy of the Forms. In The Republic, Plato states that the highest and most important Form to learn about is The Good. Underneath that are the other forms which are: universal qualities, concepts and ideals, physical living objects and physical inanimate objects. For example Justice, Wisdom and Beauty are aspects of Goodness. However, Goodness is something that Plato has never properly established what The Form of the Good exactly is but we recognise it because we understand how they correspond to our intuitive knowledge of the Form of the Good.
While Ethical Naturalists believe it holds great importance as it can convey facts and help us to understand ethical theories, there are those who strongly disagree with this. For example Intuitionists, such as Moore, believe that our intuition is more useful when wanting to know how to act morally than knowing the definitions of ethical terms. Although Non-Cognitive theories disagree with the factual content of ethical statements, it is clear that they still see some significance in ethical language. However rather than seeing it as facts, they accept that morality is subjective and suggest that the importance of ethical language is provided by the emotions conveyed in the phrases used. Perhaps more so than Emotivists, Prescriptivists see ethical language as fairly meaningful.
Deontology is the theory that an individual does something because the individual believes it is the right thing to do. They do not look further into the action or bring the possible consequences to mind. They simply believe it is the correct thing to do and act upon it. Deontology is similar to Utilitarianism because it is again based on singular decisions of an individual. Utilitarianism and Deontology are more of a structured belief or theory while virtue theory is more flexible.
Consequential is a type of ethical theory; it’s built upon moral views of acts, rules, etc. purely due to the consideration of their consequences, where the norm of consideration is worked as the norm of non-moral goodness. Happiness is a part of acquiring what could be an unsatisfying truth that we do not have a solid handle of our control or impact in our world; giving into the greatest good, as well as, ignoring what can bring negativity. It is important to make the best out of life as possible that represent positive and negative, and take the rest as life wants to give it. The theory of “good” and bad is really not a matter of concern; we have our own particular views, so what can be bad may actually be good.
Mill roots the Greatest Happiness Principle in his theory of life. The theory of life claims that all moral value can be understood in pleasure, which is intrinsically good, and pain, intrinsically bad. Therefore, an action is right if it produces pleasure and is wrong if it decreases pleasure or produces pain (Module 7.1). Mill’s theory of utility states that the utilitarian standard is not the agents’ own greatest happiness but the greatest amount of happiness altogether (Mill 20). He then goes on to explain that Jesus’ golden rule, do unto others as you would do unto you, is the “perfection of utilitarian morality” (Mill 27-28).