Analyse the key features of Virtue Ethics Essay

celibacy ethics is a custom which goes back to Plato and Aristotle it is in addition know as atomic number 18taic ethics, from the Greek word arte marrow excellence or chastity. There are a number of rudimentary features to truth ethics, unitary of the most signifi seatt being that it is an agent-centered supposition earlier than act-centered speculation. Therefore it asks the questions What sort of person ought I to be? or else than How ought I to act. The concept does non focus on actions being adjust or wrong, save on how to be a safe(p)/ arrant(a) person. Virtue ethics was re-examined and re extended in the twentieth century by philosophers much(prenominal) as G.E.M. Anscombe.Plato proposed that truth ethics centers around the achievement of mans highest good, which involves the right cultivation of his soul and the harmonious well-being of his aliveness, former(a)wise known as eud puzzleonia. Additionally, Cardinal virtues are a vital feature to the suggestio n of virtue ethics, faces are temperance, courage, prudence and justice. These Plato calculateed to consider central virtues and that, when these virtues are in counterpoise, a persons actions will be good. However, thither was non much agreement among the Greek philosophers ab turn up which virtues were central, and Aristotle gives a very opposite account of the virtues.Aristotle highlighted a significant feature to the theory as he sought to give an account of the structure of worship and explained, in his bear Nicomachean Ethics, that the point of engaging in ethics is to become good. Here, Aristotle differentiates amongst things which are good as means and things which are good as ends.Additionally, Anscombe bespeaks that eudaimonia is the highest good because we desire it for its own sake, and non just as a means to eitherthing else at all. Other good things, such a justice, are desired because they lead to a good life, whereas good liveness itself is not wanted fo r anything which it might lead to it is inherently worth having. Aristotle, foreground another feature of the ethic, suggests that humanity well-being and human booming is a life characterized by the virtues. However, this good human life is unrivaledlived in harmony and co-operation with other flock, since Aristotle saw people as not solo rational beings but withal as social beings. We live in groups and he saw the well-being of the group as more important than that of a single member.Moreover, Aristotle believed that the best focus to achieve eudaimonia was to perplex and exercise qualities that are most productive for living in a ships company. Extremes of behavior, such as being too timid at ane extreme or too assertive at the other, are unconstructive to society. This led Aristotle to create a crucial feature of virtue ethics, what he called the Golden Mean, which can be explained as striking the right balance between extremes. Each extreme he called a vice, and th e midway point where the right balance is struck he called a virtue. However, the mean is not the same of everything and depends on circumstance you need to cave in phronesis to decide on the right course of action on each(prenominal) situation.Aristotle was convinced that virtue is something which we grow and not something which we know when we are born(p) different people are not inherently good or bad, but become good or bad according to the habits they develop in themselves. Therefore, Aristotle highlighted a key feature in the ethic that it is not enough to have the know-how or up to now the habit of behaving as the perfect(a) person does, the actions are not as important as the character, and consequently the virtuous behavior must be done with the right motivation, as the virtuous person would do them.In the twentieth century there was a revival of interest in virtue ethics by philosophers who were unhappy with act-centered honest theories. Stressing key features to the theory, modern versions of virtue ethics argue that the assessment of a persons character is an important reflexion to our ethical thought and needs to be included in any ethical theory. In 1958 G.E.M. Anscombe published a paper called Modern virtuous Philosophy where she argued that the concept of moral rules and of moral obligations is flawed. She attacked the traditions of Utilitarianism and of Kant, which both set reveal principles for people to follow and which look at the morality of different actions, rather than at the character of the person.Anscombe argued that the idea that we have obligations to keep rules desexualises no sand unless people believe in God. With proscribed any absolute law-giver, there is no sense in following laws in ethics. She saw that ethical systems which tense up to establish rules even after the idea of God has been abandoned are incoherent, not recognizing that their basis depends on belief which many people no longer hold. For Anscombe , the way forward is to revive the concept of human flourishing, eudaimonia, which does not depend on any notion of God.Philippa Foot act to modernise Aristotles virtue ethics while still retention the Aristotelian understanding of character and virtue. She recognises the significant features to the ethic, such as the sizeableness of the persons own reasoning in the practice of virtue, claims that the virtues wel uttermoste the individual by leading to flourishing and stresses that the virtuous person does far more than conform to the conventions of society. Foot argues that a virtue does not check as a virtue when turned to a bad end. Virtues are good for us and also help us to correct counterproductive human passions and temptations.Additionally, in his book After Virtue, Alasdair Macintyre claims that ethical theories have unreserved resulted in ethical disagreements. The result if this, he suggests, is that people do not think there are any moral truths and consider one op inion to be as good as any other opinion. Macintyre argues that most peoples attitudes today are ground on emotivism. Macintyre added a vital feature to the ethic, as he wanted to prepare the idea that morality should be seen in terms of human purpose, but he thought it would not be possible to restore Aristotles theory of function and so he attempted to make human function, and so human virtue, depend on community.According to virtue ethics, morality is not found in actions or in duties, but in the person performing the actions, the agent. Thus morality should focus on the person, and not necessarily on the choices they make in their moral behavior. The theory concentrates on being, rather than doing, and this crucial feature results in the contrasts with other forms of ethics,which aim to show how to discover the right course of action. Although the system is based on ideals, it is no unrealistic, because it looks to actual examples of virtuous people, such as Martin Luther abi lity or Jesus it can wherefore be seen to have attainable targets. Its aim is to achieve something which people genuinely want, eudaimonia, rather than being based on arguably incoherent ideas about the after-life.Evaluate the limit to which virtue ethics can withstand comment.Virtue ethics encompasses all aspects of life rather than particular actions. It sees every moment as the possibility for getting or developing virtue. Virtue ethics issues an pick route for selective service on the tradition of moral philosophy in a way thats a different from the natural law approach. Its an alternative ethical model that fits Christian ethics and also reaches beyond sacred ethics. However, some Christians may argue that, in modern society, the extent of the relevance of the ethic can be considered insignificant as it focuses on the central issues of what it means to be human, rather than looking for rules.Therefore, virtue ethics does not pretend to be able to tell us what a good p erson would do in every situation but encourages us to be more like such a person so that we will not need an ethical theory to make our decisions for us. This plus strengthens the theory, possibly increasing the extent to which it can withstand criticism as it stresses the importance of character, providing the example someone who helps the poor out of compassion does seem to be chastely superior to someone who does it out of affair.Multiple criticisms have been voiced about the theory and many have reduced the academic degree to which the concept is valued in modern day society. For example, one criticism leveled against virtue theory is that it is far from replacing the arguments about moral duty and moral absolutes, it ultimately depends on them. Walter Schaller, in his works, argues that moral virtues have sole(prenominal) instrumental or derivative value. Virtue ethics relies on the concept of duty and the idea that there are moral norms or absolutes. This point undermine s the significance of virtue theory, as Macintyre was tryingto get out from the arguments about duty and moral actions.On the other hand, Robert Louden criticises the theory by questioning how virtue ethics can be apply to moral dilemmas. He argued that virtue ethics does not help people facing a crisis because it does not give any clear rules for action, for example what is the virtuous response to abortion? Virtue ethics does not provide any concrete answers and only says it is a matter for the practical light of the person facing the situation. However, some Christians may argue that this statement can be counteracted as a strength of the theory as a lack of concrete answers allows personal choice and freedom to decide what is morally virtuous, increasing its ability to withstand criticism.Louden also points out that it is difficult to decide who is virtuous, as acts which appear virtuous on the outside may not necessarily have good motives and vice versa. Nevertheless, virtue ethics counteracts this criticism as it, as a theory, enables us to shuffle many aspects of life, such as our social responsibilities, into our ethical reflection it looks at what makes life valuable rather than looking at what is right or wrong. It does not reject our emotions but includes them, and so is more in-tune with how people of course react to an ethical dilemma. It relates our ethical choices to the bigger picture.Additionally, it has been argued that virtue ethics does not seem to have room for basic concepts such as rights and obligations. This therefore reduces the theorys ability to withstand the criticisms proposed of it and thus reducing how applicable the theory is. As a theory of ethics is seems incapable of dealings with big issues virtue ethics does not always have a view about what makes an act right or wrong. It is vague, therefore it is breathed to make decisions.Moreover, the theory counteracts the criticisms aimed at it through the use of examples of virtuous people. Virtue ethics stresses the importance of motivating people to want to be good. Shows how we acquire and learn virtues by intimidating others. Examples of these virtuous people are Martin LutherKing and Jesus who both fought for arbitrary happiness for society.Conversely, criticisms have been constantly debilitative the theory through questions such as What is happiness? and Does Aristotles supreme happiness exist?. It has been argued that virtue ethics depends on some final end which gives shape to our lives there may not be one and being virtuous may not effect it anyway. These factors significantly countervail the extent to which the theory has survived criticism especially as the ethic seems to appraise some virtues that Christians might see as immoral, such as soldiers chip unjust wars may be courageous but that doesnt make them morally good.However, the theory has also been vitally strengthened for modern society through its acceptability of bias behavi or in favor of friends and family, foreign utilitarianism or Kant, which see impartiality as important. The relevance of the concept is also supported through its avoidance of following a formula, such as utilitarianism the greatest good for the greatest number, to work out what we ought to do and focuses instead on the kind of person we ought to be. Therefore it is a more practical way of making a decision easily. Overall, even though the criticisms of the theory are vital in reducing the extent to which it is valued in this present day, the strengths of the theory provide society with an ethical guideline as to how to be and what makes a virtuous person.