Virtue ethics is agent-centred ethics rather than act-centred. Aristotle was an Ancient Greek philosopher and believed that everyone wants to live a full and happy life, this is known as eudaimonia. Eudaimonia is the idea of ideal happiness and it is the highest good, because we desire it for its own sake and not as a means to an end. In his book, Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle stated that we want to be good, and there is a difference to things that are good as means, and things that are good as ends. A good life is something inherently worth having, unlike justice which is worth having because it leads to a good life.
His view on what drove human beings and what goodness and badness was all about (he believes we are drive by pleasure opposed to pain – therefore he was a Hedonist), 2. The principle of utility, which is his moral rule and finally 3. The Hedonic calculus (a system that helps measure how good or bad a consequence is). It is relative because it does not say that an action itself is good or bad it is purely based on the situation. Bentham was concerned with human rights and democracy, he believed that happiness shouldn’t only be for one person it should be for lots if of people.
First I have to say that I hold Philosophers in general including Plato in the highest regard, and I do agree with Plato on that Philosophers would make the best rulers. Having that said, I do find his ideas on “morality” and more specifically who the “moral” person is, very much unrealistic. In the world Plato paints with his analogies in The Republic, such “moral” persons might exist, but in reality I find it hard to believe. I do however agree with him on one point and that is: it is better to be moral than immoral; on everything else I lean more in favor with Glaucon. In The Republic, Glaucon Plato’s brother plays the “devil’s advocate” and claims that being “immoral” is more beneficial than being “moral”.
It is also referred to as the theory of utility and encourages us to behave in a way in which is useful to society. Unlike natural law which is an absolutist and deontological theory, based on religious principals, utilitarianism is a teleological, secular theory which judges morality on the consequences. Aristotle believed that good conduct promoted happiness in society and Epicurius developed Aristotle's idea by claiming that a good life consisted of the maximum amount of pleasure and the least amount of pain. Another important figure in the utilitarian development is Jeremy Bentham, he is considered to be the founder of utilitarianism and his ethical theory is said to have had a significant influence on a number of philosophers including Peter Singer. Bentham believes that humans are motivated by a desire to experience as much pleasure as possible and avoid experiences of pain.
I think that to a large extent the conflict is misunderstood, but it is also illustrative of some larger, more glaring issues in philosophy. Aristotle describes the virtuous person as one whose passions and deliberation are aligned. The person takes pleasure in, or is not, at any rate, disinclined toward, doing what he thinks is best. The virtuous person, according to Aristotle, is superior to the continent person, in whom deviant passions are in conflict with prudent deliberation, and in whom deliberation manages to defeat the passions for the control of immediacy of action. Yet it is the continent person whom Kant calls virtuous and to whom Kant ascribes moral worth.
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.
Socrates believed that people should evaluate their lives and become ethically responsible. He often considered people should not seek money or power but to become morale correct in society. One of Machiavelli’s famous quote: “It is better to be feared than loved.” He believed that leaders should do anything necessary to gain and maintain power. How can two people with opposite moral have the same ethical beliefs? Socrates and Machiavelli were both humanist philosophers.
Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832), an English philosopher and the most prominent name in relation of the founding of utilitarianism, described utilitarianism as “the greatest happiness for the greatest felicity of people”. Bentham believed that morality did not depend on faithfulness to abstract views derived from the teachings of Jesus. He however looked upon morality as an effort to produce as much happiness as possible in the world. Moreover utilitarianism is the ethical theory embracing that the morally right course of action is the action which results in the most happiness and maximizes the overall good in the world. This indicates that utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism as what is viewed to a morally correct action is based upon the actions outcome.
It is agreed by the masses that happiness is associated with living well. “For happiness we always desire for its own sake and never as a means of something else(p. 392).” The purpose of happiness is not to gain anything, but to seek for the sake of being happy. All actions focus primarily on the achievement of happiness; honor, pleasure, and intelligence may seem like they are desired as means to themselves, but all amount in an achievement of some kind of happiness. There are two different kinds of virtues: intellectual, which is taught directly, and moral, which is gained through self-experience. Aristotle views virtues as “traits that enable us to live well in communities(p. 389)” He holds the better good of the community higher than that of the individual.
The difference between an uncritical egoistic hedonist and Epicurus is what outcome is being sought after. Uncritical hedonists base their selections on whatever will give them the most pleasure at that moment. Epicurus, and other rational/critical egoistic hedonists base their choices on what will lead to the most pleasure (or least amount of pain) in the future. According to his philosophy, the only way to attain long-term pleasure is to practice the virtues of simplicity and prudence in every aspect of life. Epicurus believed one must understand the desires that motivate him to attain peace of mind.