VIRTUE ETHICS

Virtue Ethics
 It is the ethical framework that is concerned with understanding the good as a matter of
developing the virtuous character of a person.
 Virtue ethics, on the other hand, focuses on the formation of one’s character brought about
by determining and doing virtuous acts.
 Virtue ethics was derived from or is closely associated to Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics.
The term virtue comes from the latin word ‘virtus’ which means manhood or perhaps
‘worth’. Thus, the word of any action of man is based from virtue instead from duty or
consequence, it does not posit a question, ‘what shall I do or perhaps what rule I ought to
follow?’ Rather, how should I carry out my life if I am to live well?’ The emphasis therefore
is on what an individual can do to produce the sort of character that instinctively does the
right thing. Thus, virtue ethics holds that it is not only important to do the right thing but
equally one must have the right disposition, motivation, and traits for being good and doing
right.
THE ETHICS OF VIRTUE

 Virtue ethics date back to aristotle (384-322

bce) in his
Nichomachean ethics.
 Aristotle’s central question: “What is the
good of man?”
Aristotle

 Aristotle was born in Macedonia and studied philosophy under Plato in

Athens. He was considered to be the brightest among Plato’s students in
the former’s school, the Academy. He later founded his own school,
Lyceum, where he became a very productive intellectual, having written
numerous works on different topics. Such as the theoretical and practical
sciences, and logic. He was also known to be the tutor of Alexander the
Great who tried to conquer the world. Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics is
his major work in moral philosophy.
For Plato, the real is outside the realm for any
human sensory experience but can somehow be
grasped by one’s intellect. The truth and,
ultimately, the good are in the sphere of forms or
ideas transcending daily human condition. On
the other hand, for Aristotle the real is found
within our everyday encounter with objects in
the world. What makes nature intelligible is its
character of having both form and matter.
Therefore, the truth and the good cannot exist
apart form the object and are not independent of
our experience.
 When one speaks of the truth, for example, how beautiful Juan Luna’s Spoliarium is, she cannot
discuss its beauty separately from the particular painting itself. Same is true with understanding the good:
the particular act of goodness that one does in the world is more important that any conception of the good
that is outside and beyond the realm of experience. One sees the ethical theory of Aristotle as engaging the
good in our day-to-day living.
HAPPINESS
AND
ULTIMATE
PURPOSE
 Aristotle begins his discussion of ethics by showing that every
act that a person does is directed toward a particular purpose,
aim, of what the Greeks called telos. There is a purpose why one
does something, and for Aristotle, a person’s action manifest a
good that she aspires for. Every pursuit of a person of a hopes to
achieve a good. One eats for the purpose of the good, that it gives
sustenance to the body. A person pursues a chosen career, aiming
for a good, that is, to provide a better future for her family. A
person will not do anything which is not beneficial to her.
Even a drug user “thinks” that substance abuse will cause her
good. This does not necessarily mean that using drugs is good but
a “drug addict” would want to believe that such act is good.
Therefore, for Aristotle, the good is considered to be the telos or
purpose for which all acts seek to achieve.
One must understand that an individual does actions and pursuits in life
and correspondingly each of these activities has different aims. Aristotle is
aware that one does an act not only to achieve a particular purpose but
also believes such purpose can be utilized for a higher goal or activity,
which then can be used to achieve an even higher purpose and so on. In
other words, the different goods that one pursues form a hierarchy of telos
(plural form of telos)
But a certain difference is found among ends; some
are activities, others are products apart from the
activities that produces them. Where there are ends
from the actions, it is the nature of the products to be
better than the activities.
What is the highest goal for Aristotle?
What goal is both final and self-sufficient?
According to Aristotle, older individuals would
agree that the highest purpose and the ultimate
good of man is happiness, or for the Greeks,
Eudaimonia.
Now, such a thing happiness, above all else, is held to be; for this we choose always
for itself and never for the sake of something else, but honor, pleasure, reason, and
every virtue we choose indeed for themselves (for if nothing resulted form them we
should still choose each of them), but we choose them also for the sake of
happiness, judging that by means of them we shall be happy. Happiness, on the
other hand, no one chooses for the sake of these, nor in general, for anything other
than itself.
Happiness for Aristotle is the only self-sufficient aim that one can aspire for. No
amount of wealth or power can be more fulfilling than having achieved the
condition of happiness. One can imagine a life of being wealthy, powerful, and
experiencing pleasurable feelings and yet, such life is still not satisfying without
happiness. Once happiness is achieved, things such as wealth, power, and
pleasurable feelings just give value-added benefits in life. The true measure of
well-being for Aristotle is not by means of richness of fame but by the condition
of having attained a happy life.
How How
doesdoes a person
a person arriveatather
arrive herhighest
highest good?
good?

According to Aristotle, if an individual’s action can achieved

the highest good , then one must investigate how she functions
which enables her to achieved her ultimate purpose. If she
performs her function well, then she is capable of arriving at
happiness.
What defines human beings is her function or activity of reason?
Life seems to be common even to plants, but we are seeking what is peculiar to
man. Let us exclude, therefore, the life nutrition and growth. Next there would be
a life of perception, but is also seems to be common even to the horse, the ox, and
other animals. There remains, then an activie life of the element that has a rational
principle; of this, one part has such a principle in the sense of being obedient to
one, the other in the sense of possessing one and exercising thought.
What defines a person therefore is her function or activity of reason. A person’s action
to be considered as truly human must be an act that is always in accordance to reason.
The function of human being is to act following the dictates of her reason. Any person
for that matter utilizes her reason but Aristotle further says that a person cannot only
perform her function but she can also perform it well.
The local says “Madaling maging tao, mahirap
magpakatao”

It can be understood in the light of Aristotle’s thought on the

function of a good person. Any human being can perform the
activityof reason; thus, being human is achievable. However, a
good human being strives hard in doing an activity in an
excellent way. Therefore, the task of being human becomes
more difficult because doing such activity well takes more
effort on the part of the person.
Virtue as
Excellence
Achieving the highest purpose of a human person concerns the ability to function according to reason and to perform an
activity well or excellently. This excellent way of doing things is called virtue or arête by the Greeks. Aristotle is quick
to add that is virtue is something that one strives for in time. One does not become an excellent person overnight.

“For one swallow does not make a summer, nor does one day; and so too one day, or a short time, does not make a man
blessed and happy”
 What exactly makes
a human being
excellent?

Aristotle says that excellence is an

activity of the human soul and
therefore, one needs to understand the
very structure of a person’s soul which
must be directed be her rational
activity in an excellent way. For
Aristotle, the human soul is divided
into two parts; the Irrational element
and the rational faculty.
 Irrational Element
(this part of man is not in the realm where virtue is exercised because, as the term suggests, it cannot be dictated by reason)

Vegetative soul
-the vegetative aspect functions as giving nutrition and
providing the activity of physical growth in a person
-the vegetative aspect of the soul follows the natural processes
involved in the physical activities and growth of a person.

Appetitive soul
-it works as a desiring faculty of man.
-the act of desiring in itself is an impulse that naturally runs
counter to reasons and most of the time refuses to go along with
reason.
Rational Faculty
Knows what is right and wrong

Moral
-concern the act of doing

Intellectual
- Concern the act of knowing
One rational aspect where a person can attain excellence
is in the intellectual faculty of the soul. As stated by
Aristotle, this excellence is attained through teaching.
Through time, one learns form the vast experiences in life
where she gains knowledge on these things. One learns
and gains wisdom by being taught or by learning.
There are two ways by which one can attain intellectual excellence:

Philosophic wisdom Practical wisdom

It deals with attaining knowledge about the It is an excellence in knowing the right conduct in carrying
fundamental principles and truths that govern out a particular act.
the universe.
One can attain a wisdom that can provide us with a guide
It helps one understand in general the meaning on how to behave in our daily lives.
of life.

Although the condition of being excellent can be attained by a person through the
intellectual aspect of the soul, this situation does not make her into a morally good
individual. However, Aristotle suggest that although the rational functions of a person
(moral and intellectual) are distinct from each other, it is necessary for human to attain
the intellectual virtue of practical wisdom in order to accomplish a morally virtuous act.
 In carrying out a morally virtuous life, one needs the intellectual guide of practical wisdom
in steering the self toward the right choices and actions. Aristotle is careful in making a sharp
distinction between moral and intellectual virtue.

In itself, having practical wisdom or the excellence in knowing what to act upon does not
make someone already morally virtuous. Knowing the good is different from determining and
acting in what is good. But a morally good person has to achieve the intellectual virtue of
practical wisdom to perform the task of being moral.

This distinction draws a sharp contrast between Aristotle’s understanding of the dynamics
of knowledge and action from that of Socrates’s view that knowledge already contains the
ability of choice or action
This is why some say that all the virtues are forms of practical wisdom and
why Socrates, in one aspect, was on the right track while in another, he went
astray; in thinking that all the virtues were forms of practical wisdom, he was
wrong, but in saying they implied practical wisdom, he was right. This is
confirmed by the fact that even now, all men, when they define virtue, after
naming the state of character and its object, add “that (state) which is in
accordance with the right rule”; now the right is that which is in accordance
with practical wisdom. All men, seem somehow to divine that this kind of state
is virtue, viz, that which is in accordance with practical wisdom.
 It seems that for Socrates, moral goodness is already within the realm of intellectual
excellence. Knowing the good implies the ability to perform morally virtuous acts. For
Aristotle, however, having intellectual excellence does not necessarily mean that one already
has the capacity of doing the good. Knowing the good that needs to be done is different from
doing the good that one needs to accomplish.

Therefore, rational faculty of a person tells us that she is capable of achieving two
kinds of virtue moral and intellectual. In discussing moral virtue, Aristotle says that it is
attained by means of habit. A morally virtuous man for Aristotle is someone who
habitually determines the good and does the right actions. Moral virtue is acquired
through habit. Being morally good is a process of getting used to doing the proper act.
The saying “practice makes perfect” can be applied to this aspect of a person. Therefore,
for Aristotle, a person is not initially good by nature.
Moral Virtue and

Mesotes
 Developing a practical wisdom
involves learning from
experiences.

Knowledge is not inherent Knowing the right thing to do

to a person when one is confronted by a
choice is not easy.
One needs to develop this knowledge by This is why when it comes to life choices,
exercising the faculty of practical reason in one can seek the advice of elders in the
her daily life. In attaining practical community, those who gained rich life
wisdom, she may initially make mistakes experiences and practical wisdom,
on how reason is applied to a particular because they would be able to assist
moral choice or action. But through these someone’s moral deliberation. Parents can
mistakes, she will be able to sustain advice their children how to behave in
practical wisdom to help steer another’s front of family members and relatives.
ability to know morally right choices and Senior members of the community like
action. In other words, she is able to priests, counsellors, and leaders may also
mature and grow in her capacity on guide the young members on how
knowing what to do and living a morally relationships with others are fostered.
upright life.
 Based on Aristotle, a morally virtuous person is person is
concerned with achieving her appropriate action in a manner that
is neither excessive nor deficient. In other words, virtue is the
middle or the intermediary point in between extremes. One has to
function in a state that her personality manifest the right amount
of feelings, passions, and ability for a particular act. Generally,
feelings and passions are neutral which means that, in themselves,
they are neither morally right nor wrong. When one shows a
feeling of anger, we cannot immediately construe it as morally
wrong act. But the rightness or wrongness of feelings, passions,
and abilities lies in the degree of their application in a given
situation. It is right to get angry at an offensive remark but it is not
right to get angry at everyone just because you were offended by
someone. One can be excessive in the manner by which she
manifest these feelings, passions, and abilities. But can also be
deficient in the way she express these
 A morally virtuous person targets the mesotes. For Aristotle, the task of targeting the mean
is always difficult because every situation is different from one another. Thus, the mesotes is
constantly moving depending on the circumstance where she is in. The mean is not the same
for all individuals. As pointed out by Aristotle , the mean is simply an arithmetical proportion.
Therefore, the task of being moral involves seriously looking into and understanding a
situation and assessing properly every particular detail relevant to the determination of the
mean. One can be angry with someone, but the degree and state of anger depends accordingly
with the nature of the person she is angry with. The aid of reason dictates how humans should
show different anger toward a child and a mature individual. Mesotes determines whether the
act applied is not excessive or deficient. Likewise, an individual cannot be good at doing
something haphazardly but reason demands a continuous habituation of a skill to perfect an
act. Targeting the middle entails being immersed in a moral circumstance, understanding the
experience, and eventually, developing the knowledge of identifying the proper way or the
mean to address a particular situation.
 Moral virtue is firstly the condition arrived at by a person who has a character identified out of her habitual exercise of
particular actions. One’s character is seen as a growth in terms of the continuous preference of the good. Secondly, in
moral virtue, the action done that normally manifest feelings and passions is chosen because it is the middle. The middle
does not fail short or is exercise of the proper proportion by which these feelings or passion should be expressed. Aristotle
adds that the middle is relative to us. This does not imply that mesotes totally depends in what the person identifies as the
middle. Such case would signify that Aristotle adheres to relativism. But Aristotle’s middle is not relative to the person but
to the situation and the circumstance that once is in. This means that in choosing the middle o
 Excess Middle Deficiency

Impulsiveness Self-control Indecisiveness

“they act on instinct, without thinking “the ability to control oneself, in “not settling an issue.”
decisions through” particular one's emotions and desires or
the expression of them in one's behavior,
especially in difficult situations.”

Recklessness Courage Cowardice

“lack of regard for the danger or “the ability to do something that frightens “lack of bravery”
consequences of one's actions; rashness.” one.”

Prodigality Liberality Meanness

“Extravagant spending” “the quality of giving or spending freely.” “unkindness, spitefulness, or unfairness.”