Virtue Ethics from Other Normative Theories

997 Words4 Pages
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. So according to Hursthouse, in Virtue-ethics, a right action is that of what a Virtuous person would do in a certain circumstance. Some examples of virtues are, courage, temperance, generosity, friendliness, modesty, truthfulness, justice, and patience or good temper. I would say that the main difference between the three main approaches (virtue ethics, deontology, and consequentialism) lies within the conflict of moral dilemmas involved. For example, in the case of lying, a deontologist would argue that lying is always wrong, doesn’t matter even if it holds any potential to creating a greater good. While the consequentialist would say that to lie is a wrong thing to do because it would cause negative outcomes as a result, however lying could still be allowed, knowing that it would lead to the creation of a greater good. While as for a virtue-ethicist would care less on just about lying, but focus more on what does the decision say about his/her own traits and character. So here are several features that make the theory of virtue ethics distinctive compared to the other
Open Document