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.
In Books Five through Seven, he addresses this challenge, arguing (in effect) that the just city and the just human being as he has sketched them are in fact good and are in principle possible. After this long digression, Socrates in Books Eight and Nine finally delivers three “proofs” that it is always better to be just than unjust. Then, because Socrates wants not only to show that it is always better to be just but also to convince Glaucon and Adeimantus of this point, and because Socrates' proofs are opposed by the teachings of poets, he bolsters his case in Book Ten by indicting the poets' claims to represent the truth and by offering a new myth that is consonant with his proofs. As this overview makes clear, the center of Plato's Republic is a contribution to ethics: a discussion of what the virtue justice is and why a person should be just. Yet because Socrates links his discussion of personal justice to an account of justice in the city and makes claims about how good and bad cities are arranged, the Republic sustains reflections on political questions, as well.
Aristotle develops this and distinguishes between things that are good as means (for the sake of something else) and things that are good as ends (for their own sake only). Aristotle believes that our end or telos is to achieve eudaimonia (flourishing in society). Aristotle discusses the traits or virtues one who achieves eudaimonia would have and that a good human life is characterised by the virtues. Central to Aristotle’s idea is that humans should live in harmony with each other, as we are not just rational beings but also social beings. Aristotle saw two types of virtues: intellectual and moral virtues.
As Aristotle said: “If, then, there is some end of the things we do, which we desire for its own sake, and if we do not choose everything for the sake of something else clearly this must be the good and the chief good” (Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics, Book 1, 2). He believed that humans have three souls; happiness is found on the rational soul and is particular
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. Each person has a purpose to excel in their community, while at the same time adding to the greater good of their community. “consider virtue, as this will perhaps be the best way of studying happiness(p. 396).” Virtue and happiness are directly related, for virtues are the way of achieving happiness. Aristotle defines a virtue as moral excellence, or goodness. In order to achieve this excellence the mean between two extremes must sought.
This paper will argue Plato and Aristotle's beliefs on the theory of Moral Education which is how we learn to become good, moral, virtuous people. It will defend Aristotle’s theory of Habit which basically states that things are learned through habit and practice vs. Plato’s theory of recollection which states that all knowledge that has ever been known and will ever be known is already preexistent in our memory. Aristotle’s theory of habit can be supported best because he believes that what we need in order to be mentally and physically well is the proper appreciation of the goods of life such as virtue, friendship, wealth, happiness etc. Yet in order to acquire and understand those goods, it is required that we are shown how to by the way we are raised, our habits and most of all through practice. Plato's theory of recollection also known as the anamnesis states that knowledge is previously known before birth and will always be known, opposed to being taught and learned.
In “The Allegory of the Cave”, an excerpt from the Republic, Plato puts forth various ideas about the concept of conformity versus individuality. Referring specifically to paragraph 29 of the allegory, Plato points out that those quickest to follow are those most likely to be rewarded. Despite the pressure to conform to dominant ideas and styles of society, Plato concurs with Homer, eifhf, whom he quotes in the passage that creative and free thinking is the ideal to aim for. The most egregious example of conformity in thought and action occurs in countries without a free press where the government controlled media has complete power in presenting ideas deemed permissible. The ultimate type of conforming is the “thought police” in George Orwell’s 1984.
The manner in which a human being behaves solely depends on what he considers good. In his definition, something good is something that acclaims happiness which is a state of nature. Mainly, the subject is concerned with the human aim of having a character of virtue that brings him good and eventually happiness (Urmson, 1988, p. 564). Aristotle proposes some rules of conduct and gives an explanation of Aristotle-Ethical Analysis paper virtue and goodness that is still helpful to the modern man in attaining full and a better understanding of his responsibilities as a member of
He is not saying to live an isolated life but to be self-sufficient within a community. Aristotle links happiness and virtue. Aristotle says, “Since happiness is a certain sort of activity of the soul in accord with complete virtue.” (Hackett 16). Aristotle claims that in order for us to achieve happiness is through a good moral character. One virtue of character Aristotle speaks about is
From this mastery, Aristotle contends, a man will derive pleasure. This mastery does not only benefit the individual, but will also benefit society, and therefore is morally virtuous. In contrast, Epicurus’ ideals promote the pursuit of pleasure whether knowledge is attained or not. This philosophy is potentially hazardous because the individual’s pursuit of pleasure can result in harm to himself and his surroundings, classifying it as morally unsound. Epicurus fails to define the boundaries of moral virtue, merely stating there could be harmful consequences without specific definition, Epicurus ultimately fails to develop a strong moral program.