Virtue ethics

Virtue ethics is a branch of philosophy that deals with the deeply set moral character of individuals. Virtuous people are likely to act in a way that promotes moral rightness and benefits the greatest number of people, even if their actions occasionally break rules or cause harm. The study of virtue ethics dates back to ancient times, particularly to the work of Greek philosopher Aristotle, who believed that virtuous living is the key to a happy and fulfilled life. Virtue ethics was a major force in world philosophies until around the 1800s, when people began to focus more on social law and order instead of personal morality. However, virtue ethics resurfaced in the mid-1900s and remained an important and influential topic in the twenty-first century.

Background

Virtue ethics first appeared in ancient times. In Eastern tradition, philosophers such as Confucius and Mencius embraced these ethics. In Western philosophy, virtue ethics mainly developed in ancient Greece. There, thinkers such as Aristotle and Plato developed and promoted virtue ethics as the primary means of approaching moral questions and decisions. In particular, Aristotle focused many studies on ethics, believing that they held the key to a state of prosperity, happiness, and overall fulfillment he referred to as eudaimonia (a term based on Greek words for “flourishing” or “joy”). Aristotle taught that deeply set virtues and other related traits shaped a person’s moral standing even more than that person’s behaviors. More specifically, Aristotle identified two related concepts, arête (virtue) and phronesis (wisdom of a moral or pragmatic nature), as main components of human excellence and happiness.

Around the world, the promotion of virtues remained a primary focus of philosophy and moral studies for hundreds of years. It was dominant in the West, where philosophers such as Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth century and David Hume in the eighteenth century looked to ethics to explain human nature and its potential improvement. Virtue ethics remained influential through the Enlightenment period, an intellectual movement peaking in the eighteenth century that promoted individualism and skepticism and attempted to improve individuals and societies through science and reason. However, following that period, virtue ethics began to wane in their influence as thinkers and leaders took new perspectives on humans and their motivations and improvement.

These new philosophic approaches promoted the use of law enforcement and social order, sharply contrasting with the former focus on the character of the individual. To people in this period, ethical codes seemed too intangible and subjective, and more outward means of upholding good behavior—such as by establishing rules and enforcing consequences for breaking those rules—seemed a better approach. By the nineteenth century, virtue ethics had slid from popularity and was replaced by other schools of ethical thought such as deontology, utilitarianism, and consequentialism.

This law-and-order approach to social and individual excellence lasted into the mid-twentieth century, during which time it oversaw stunning leaps in scientific and technological achievement. However, this era also experienced some of the greatest horrors in human history, including two World Wars, acts of genocide, and economic disasters. Many societies became urbanized, focusing human endeavors on factories that mass-produced cheap consumer items, and human ambition on acquiring these items. Weapons technology increased to the point where atomic armaments began to pose an existential threat to human existence. Facing such jarring shifts, leaps in power, and visions of horror, many philosophers questioned the wisdom of law-and-order techniques and the related widespread abandonment of virtue ethics.

Many theorists began to reexamine the potential of virtue ethics around the 1950s. One of the most notable of these theorists was Elizabeth (G. E. M.) Anscombe, who wrote about the failings of modern philosophical approaches like utilitarianism and deontology. These schools paid little attention to important topics such as moral character, individual happiness, and other emotions, and the traits and beliefs that can lead to human fulfillment and social betterment. Anscombe and others pointed out that other schools of philosophy failed to look deeply into individuals or address crucial moral questions. These schools also failed to closely examine human vices and other negative traits that could lead to great moral failings and crimes.

Overview

Ethics is a system involving morals, or perceptions of good or bad behavior, that impact how people choose to think and act. The word derives from the Greek ethos, meaning “character” or “habit,” and borrows ideas from countless other cultures, philosophies, and spiritual beliefs. In philosophy, ethics generally explores morally good actions that benefit individuals as well as society. Ethics philosophers have applied their theories to questions on many scales, from considerations of how individuals can live more fulfilled lives to how societies can tackle controversies such as abortion law and human rights protections.

Ethics is a complex field of study, and philosophers usually approach it using three perspectives: meta-ethics, applied ethics, and normative ethics. Meta-ethics takes the broadest perspective by examining how moral and ethical judgments form and what they mean to different people and societies. Applied ethics takes the most specific approach by employing, or applying, various specific ethical principles to real-world controversies. These ethicists have explored highly divisive issues such as the death penalty, class conflict, and international relationships. Normative ethics takes a middle route by examining the makeup of ethical beliefs and principles and the exact nature of judgments of what is right or wrong.

Normative ethics includes many important aspects, all of which seek to determine the roots and meanings of moral and ethical standards (or norms) in societies. Some of these aspects include deontology (the study of rules and laws and their effects on human behavior), utilitarianism (the study of the thoughts and actions of individual people), and consequentialism (the study of the results of various thoughts and actions). The final main avenue of normative ethics is virtue ethics. Virtue ethics shares many concepts with other forms of normative ethics and other philosophical schools in its quest to identify and emphasize the moral and ethical character of people.

Whereas other forms of normative ethics may explore topics such as duties, laws, rewards, or punishments relating to ethical questions, virtue ethics mainly seeks to determine the rightness or wrongness of various courses of thought and action. Virtue ethicists might focus on perceptions such as that helping the needy is charitable and generous, while stealing from neighbors is underhanded and greedy. In addition, virtue ethicists may look beyond the apparent—such as a specific action or a specific result—to examine the underlying ethical character of a subject. In this perspective, it may be possible for a person to be highly virtuous even when breaking rules or causing negative consequences, simply due to the rightness of that person’s moral character.

Within virtue ethics, the concept of virtue is described as a deeply set and consistent character trait that demonstrates a person’s moral standing. Many theorists believe that some virtues are universally agreed-upon and should be recognized and admired in any culture because they should come naturally to all humans who seek them. Four fundamental virtues are linked to ancient virtue ethics. One of these is courage, or the willingness to take risks and make sacrifices to benefit the greater good. Another is justice, or fair and equitable treatment of others. Temperance is a fundamental virtue relating to moderation, or avoiding excessive behaviors. Finally, the virtue of prudence involves thoughtfulness and wisdom that allows one to make mindful decisions that benefit as many people as possible.

Some ethicists disagree over the extent to which ethics may differ between cultures and across time periods. Some have suggested that traditional lists from ancient times may require updating to better fit the realities of the modern world. For example, theologian and ethicist James F. Keenan accepts the ancient virtues of justice and prudence, but replaces the others with fidelity and self-care. Fidelity relates to loyalty and caring reserved for loved ones, and self-care entails tending to one’s own physical, mental, spiritual, and emotional needs. In this view, prudence also includes being aware of the spectrum of ethics and constantly seeking to increase one’s ethical strength and virtues.

A guiding principle in virtue ethics is to consider in each situation and decision what a truly virtuous person would do. The truly virtuous person would make the most morally right choice, even if that was not strictly in line with prevailing rules or if it risked negative repercussions. The virtual choice will also avoid all non-virtuous courses of thought or action, often termed vices. Some vices are the reverses of virtues: for example, recklessness instead of mindfulness, cowardice instead of bravery, or deceitfulness instead of honesty. The virtuous person must be viewed and judged on a broad scale. That person’s overall life behavior must show consistent virtue at the core of the person’s identity, even if outward appearances may sometimes misleadingly suggest otherwise.

In this way, virtue ethics is more concerned with character than actions, and honors good people rather than punishes bad behavior. It also requires that people fully devote themselves to right thought and action if they wish to become truly virtuous people. To become truly virtuous, people must contemplate such factors as the ideals they represent, the nature of their identities, the goals of their lives, and the means by which they plan to reach their goals. Supporters of virtue ethics believe that encouraging people to become truly good can have immeasurably important positive effects on society. Critics, however, point out some flaws in the system, mainly that the exact nature of virtues can vary between people and cultures.

Bibliography

Anscombe, G. E. M. Human Life, Action, and Ethics. St. Andrews Studies in Philosophy and Public Affairs / Imprint Academic, 2005.

Athanassoulis, Nafsika. “Virtue Ethics.” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, www.iep.utm.edu/virtue/. Accessed 13 June 2020.

“Ethics: A General Introduction.” BBC, 2014, www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/introduction/intro‗1.shtml. Accessed 13 June 2020.

Garrett, Jan. “Virtue Ethics.” Western Kentucky University, 2005, people.wku.edu/jan.garrett/ethics/virtthry.htm. Accessed 13 June 2020.

Hursthouse, Rosalind. “Virtue Ethics.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 8 Dec. 2016, plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-virtue/. Accessed 13 June 2020.

Richter, Duncan. “G. E. M. Anscombe (1919–2001).” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, www.iep.utm.edu/anscombe/. Accessed 13 June 2020.

“Virtue Ethics.” BBC, 2014, www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/introduction/virtue.shtml. Accessed 13 June 2020.

“Virtue Ethics.” Online Guide to Ethics and Moral Philosophy, Carnegie Mellon University, 2002, caae.phil.cmu.edu/Cavalier/80130/part2/II‗5.html. Accessed 13 June 2020.

"Virtue Ethics." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 11 Oct. 2022, plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-virtue/. Accessed 27 Aug. 2024.