MODULE 8 Readings

 17 Virtue Ethics (Villanueva)

Meaning and Origin

The word virtue comes from the Latin root vir, for man. At first, virtue meant manliness or
valor, being parallel to the old expression “man of character”, but over time it settled into the
sense of moral excellence. Virtue can also mean excellence in general while it can be
construed also as the quality of being morally good. Virtue ethics is classified as a
teleological ethical principle. Teleological or teleology comes from the key greek word, telos,
meaning an end or purpose proper to one’s nature. In other words, attaining virtue is the telos
or purpose proper to human nature, e.g. virtue is knowledge in Socrates, and virtue of
character and intellectual virtue in Aristotle.

Socrates, as represented in Plato's early dialogues, held that virtue is a sort of knowledge (the
knowledge of good and evil) that is required to reach the ultimate good, or eudaimonia, which
is what all human desires and actions aim to achieve. Discussion of what were known as the
Four Cardinal Virtues (prudence, justice, fortitude and temperance) can be found in Plato's
"Republic". He also claimed that the rational part of the soul or mind must govern the
spirited, emotional and appetitive parts in order to lead all desires and actions to eudaimonia,
the principal constituent of which is virtue.

The concept reached its highest elevation in Aristotle's "Nicomachean Ethics" in the 4th
Century B.C.E.. Aristotle held that eudaimonia is constituted, not by honor, wealth or power,
but by rational activity in accordance with virtue over a complete life, what might be
described today as productive self-actualization. This rational activity, he judged, should
manifest as honesty, pride, friendliness, wittiness, rationality in judgment; mutually beneficial
friendships and scientific knowledge.

The Greek idea of the virtues was later incorporated into Scholastic Christian moral theology,
particularly by St. Thomas Aquinas in his "Summa Theologiae" of 1274 and his
"Commentaries on the Nicomachean Ethics". The Christian virtues were also based in large
part on the Seven Virtues from Aurelius Clemens Prudentius's epic poem (410 A.D.):
chastity, temperance, charity, diligence, kindness, patience and humility. Practice of these
virtues was alleged to protect one against temptation from the Seven Deadly Sins (lust,
gluttony, greed, sloth, wrath, envy and pride).

The term "virtue ethics" is a relatively recent one, essentially coined during the 20th Century
revival of the theory, and it originally defined itself by calling for a change from the then
dominant normative theories of Deontology (e.g. Immanuel Kant with Categorical
Imperatives) and Consequentialism (e.g. Jeremy Bentham on Utilitarianism).

To illustrate the difference among three key moral philosophies mentioned above, ethicists
Mark White and Robert Arp refer to the film The Dark Knight where Batman has the
opportunity to kill the Joker. Utilitarians, White and Arp suggest, would endorse killing the
Joker. By taking this one life, Batman could save multitudes. Deontologists, on the other
hand, would reject killing the Joker simply because it’s wrong to kill. But a virtue ethicist
“would highlight the character of the person who kills the Joker. Does Batman want to be the
kind of person who takes his enemies’ lives?” No, in fact, he doesn’t.

So, virtue ethics helps us understand what it means to be a virtuous human being. And, it
gives us a guide for living life without giving us specific rules for resolving ethical dilemmas.
Character Building For A Good Life

Imagine a person who always knows what to say, can diffuse a tense situation, deliver tough
news gracefully, confident without being arrogant, courageous but not reckless, generous but
never prodigal. This is the type of person everybody wants to be around with and to be like,
someone who seems to have mastered the art of being a person. This sounds like an
impossible feat but Aristotle believed that while rare, these people do exist. They are all what
we should aspire to be: virtuous!

Virtue theory does not spend a lot of time telling you what to do, there is no categorical
imperative or principles utility, and no set of rules to follow in order to be a good person,
instead it’s all about an individual’s character. Aristotle and other virtue theorists argued that
if we can just focus on being good people, the right actions naturally follow, and effortlessly;
become a good person and you will do good things.

The theory reflects the ancient assumption that humans do have a fixed nature or essence and
that the way we flourish is by adhering to that nature. Aristotle describe this in terms of what
he called proper functioning; everything has a function and a thing is good to the extent that it
fulfills its function and it is bad if it does not. This is easy to see in the things around us like a
chair whose function is to be sat upon for comfort and convenience; a flower is expected to
grow and reproduce and if it does not fulfill its function then it is a bad flower. The same is
true for humans, while we are
also animals, all the stuff that indicate proper functioning for an animal holds true for us as
well- we need to grow, be healthy and fertile. We are also a rational animal, and social
animal, so our function also involves using reason and getting along with our own species.
Proper functioning is not all about God’s plan but that nature built into us that desire to be
virtuous.

What does it mean to be virtuous? To claim that having virtue just means doing the right
thing, at the right time, in the right way, in the right amount and to the right person is vague.
For Aristotle, there is no need to be specific, because if you are virtuous, you know just what
to do. You know how to handle yourself and how to get along with others; you have a good
judgement and you know what and when it is right. Aristotle understood virtue as a set of
robust character traits that once developed, will lead to predictably good behavior. Virtue is
the midpoint between two
extremes, which are called vices; it is the right amount, the sweet spot between the extreme of
excess and the extreme of deficiency, and this spot is known as the Golden Mean; it is also
referred to by some scholars as the Theory of Moderation, or Theory of the Middle. To
demonstrate the theory let’s take a look at some particular virtues starting with courage.

What is courage? Take a closer look at this situation: while on your way home you see a
person being mugged, what is the courageous action for you to take? Your immediate reaction
might be the in line with the acclaimed idea that “a courageous person would run over there
and stop the mugging because courage means putting yourself in a harm’s way for a good
cause”. A virtuous person in the Aristotelian sense would first take a stock of the situation,
size up the mugger and have a good reason to believe that you could safely intervene, and that
is probably the courageous choice. So if you assessed the situation and you recognized that
intervention is like to mean that both you and the victim are in danger, the courageous thing
to do is not to intervene and call for help instead. According to Aristotle, courage is the
midpoint between the extremes of cowardice and recklessness – cowardice is the deficiency
of courage while recklessness is an excess of courage, and both are bad. Aristotle said that
“you definitely can have too much of a good thing”, so being courageous doesn’t mean
rushing headlong into danger, but rather “a courageous person will assess the situation, they
will know their own abilities, and they will take the right action in the particular situation”.
Furthermore, part of having courage is being able to recognize when, rather than stepping in
immediately, you need to find authority who can handle the situation that is too big for you to
tackle alone. Basically, courage is finding the right way to act. Aristotle thought all virtues
work like this: the right action is always a midpoint between two extremes so there is no “all
or nothing” in this theory including honesty. Accordingly, honesty is the midpoint between
the extremes of brutal honesty and failing to say things that need to be said – it is knowing
what needs to be put out there and what you should keep quiet about. It also means knowing
how to deliver hard truths gracefully, how to break bad news gently, or to offer criticism in a
way that it is constructive, rather that soul-crushing.

To determine the midpoint of every action can become tedious, not to mention the fact that
the midpoint could vary from person to person as well as from one situation to the other. How
then can we possibly learn to be virtuous? According to Aristotle, virtue is a skill, a way of
living, and it is something that can only really be learned through experience. Virtue is a kind
of knowledge he called practical wisdom, or phronesis. It is something that one can learn
practically in the streets or while performing those multiple concerns or chores in life like
cooking, attending classes or even reading a book. A character is developed through
habituation - if you do a virtuous thing over and over again, eventually it will become part of
your character. Furthermore, learning to do the right thing comes by way of finding those who
are, in a way, already virtuous and emulating them. These people who already possess virtues
are called moral exemplars, and according to this theory, we are built with the ability to
recognize them and with the desire to emulate them, so you learn virtue by watching it and
then doing it. In the beginning it would be hard or you may feel phony because you are just
copying someone who is better than you of being a good person. But over time these actions
will become an ingrained part of your character and eventually it becomes that robust trait
that Aristotle is talking about. It will just manifest every time you need it, that’s when know
you have virtue and before you realize it, becomes effortless.

Why do we need to build our character, apply practical wisdom and emulate moral
exemplars? What motivates us to become the ‘good person’ that we can be? Virtue theory
evokes that we should become virtuous because if we are then we can attain the pinnacle of
humanity. It allows us to attain what is known as eudaimonia, a Greek word which would
mean “a life well lived” or “a good life”, while it can also mean “human flourishing”. A life
of eudaimonia is a life of striving. It’s a life of pushing oneself to the limit and finding
success. A eudaimonistic life is full of the happiness that comes from achieving something
really difficult, rather than just having it handed to you. But choosing to live a eudaimonistic
life means that you are never done improving, constantly setting goals and working to
develop new ways to achieve them. Choosing to live life in this way also means you’ll face
disappointments and failures. Eudaimonia does not mean a life of cupcakes and rainbows, it
does mean rather the good feeling of sinking into your bed after an absolutely exhausting day
in school or office – it is the satisfaction of knowing that you accomplished a lot and then you
pushed yourself to be the very best person that you could be.

Summary

Virtue ethics is the quest to understand and live a life of moral character. This character-based
approach to morality assumes that we acquire virtue through practice: honing our strengths
while working on our weaknesses. By practicing being honest, brave, just, generous, and so
on, a person develops an honorable and moral character. According to Aristotle, by honing
virtuous habits, people will likely make the right choice when faced with ethical challenges.
(Lecture of Mr. Raul Leandro Villanueva)

 18 Virtue Ethics
Virtue ethics is regarded with the theories of Self-Realization. Theories of self- realization
represent the moral reflections of the ancient people more than two millennia years ago. The
common denominator of these theories is the idea that the moral good of the individual
consists in the development of one’s potentialities as perfectly as possible, and thus fulfilling
and realizing one’s nature. This fulfillment is achieved by actualizing man’s possibilities,
considering all important elements of human nature and including the inherent social
character of the human person. Virtue
ethics considers that moral life should be concerned with cultivating a virtuous character
rather than following rules of actions. In virtue ethics, a moral person is someone who
displays the character traits of honesty, courage, and integrity.

Virtue ethics was introduced by Socrates in his ‘know-thyself ‘principle which is a lifetime
project inculcating self-questioning, self-reflection and self-assessment. This process of self-
knowing implies that a person cannot cheat himself/herself since for Socrates, ‘an
unexamined life is not worth living.’ In life, one has to be wise by being prudent, temperate,
courageous and just. Wisdom sums up everything that a person does. Plato’s moral
philosophy (429 – 347 B.C.) introduced the view that things that exist on this earth are merely
imperfect copies or reflections of the ideal world. Ideas are perfect, eternal, immutable and
universal. Things we perceive through our senses in space and time are but the temporary
manifestations of the ideal, which is one, indivisible, timeless and space-less. Thus, human
dignity, integrity and virtues continue to live even if the person already dies. In another sense,
Platonic morality implies that ‘you cannot put a good man down.’

Virtues are unseen and indefinable yet they are important, valuable and essential. So, we are
to strive to attain completeness of the Good, Beauty and Truth, and yet, we can never
complete them absolutely.

Known as father of idealism, Plato grounded his ethical thought where morality consists
essentially in the constant imitation of the Good, the highest of all ideas. To be moral, a
human person ought to know the Good, to follow or do the Good, and ultimately to possess
the Good. In his allegory of the cave, the world is an imperfect copy of the ideal world; thus,
ideas are eternal, immortal and perfect and ignorance is the only evil (absence of good). For
this reason, one must educate oneself through virtues that are eternal, immutable or
immeasurable – good, beauty and truth.

1. Aristotle (384 – 322 B.C.)

Unlike his teacher Plato, Aristotle believes that the world that we perceive is the real world.
Human nature is as it actually is and not simply a copy or manifestation of the idea, e.g., man.
Man is a composite of body and soul, mind and matter, senses and intellect. Man is, therefore,
a rational being. While man has a nature in common with the other animals, he is, however,
above all of them because of his reason. As such, man strives towards an end or goal in view.
This is the Good. But what is the Good that man seeks? To Aristotle, it is happiness. But
what is man’s true happiness? To
answer this question, we must understand what man’s true end is. What is the proper function
or purpose of man?

If man is rational then the proper function of man is the act of reason. For Aristotle, the end or
function of man could only be the activity of reason brought to its fullest extent, namely, the
moral virtues viewed within the framework of a communal life of the “polis” and the “act of
contemplation.” Moral virtue is following the rule of moderation: taking the middle between
two extremes, excess and deficiency. Overeating as well as eating too little is bad; eating
moderately is good. To drink much alcohol results to hang-over while not drinking alcohol
can result to making the body imbalanced. To experience real happiness, one needs to drink
moderately.
To Aristotle, the act of contemplation is the best and most perfect virtue. Contemplation is to
engage in the highest, most perfect type of reflection, whereby man can commune with the
divine and eternal truths. It is the fulfilment of the highest potential of man as a rational being.
The twin ends of moral virtues and act of contemplation enable man to attain happiness.
Happiness or “eudaimonia” is the result of virtuous living, the proper exercise of reason in all
of man’s action and endeavors.

It is truly important for persons to live as humans, thus must practice virtues such as
righteousness, honesty, integrity, moderation, goodness, truth and sincerity. On the other
hand, the possible counterargument is that virtue ethics is not always the best to resolve
ethical dilemmas. Issues are not resolved by being good alone nor being righteous alone.

Terms in Aristotelian Ethics

Akrasia - Usually translated as “incontinence,” this term connotes a lack of self-control. A

person exhibiting akrasia knows what good behavior consists of but lacks the self-control not
to give in to physical pleasures. The concept of akrasia is significant to Aristotle, as he
generally agrees with the Socratic claim that no one willingly does evil and that all
wrongdoing is a result of ignorance. If the incontinent person acts wrongly in full knowledge
of what is good, this poses a dilemma for Socratic ethics, which Book VII of the Ethics
attempts to answer.

Arete - Usually translated as “virtue,” this important term means something more akin to
“excellence.” For the Greeks, arete can be used to refer not only to a person’s moral or
intellectual virtues, but to any other kind of excellence, be it the fitness of an athlete or even
the sharpness of a knife. Generally speaking, a person, animal, or thing exhibits arete when it
is performing its function properly. That the Greeks use the term arete in their discussions of
ethics implies a strong sense that humans have a function just as knives do, and that we
become good by fulfilling this function.

Doctrine of the Mean - Aristotle’s doctrine, stated most explicitly in Book II, that virtue is a
mean state between the vicious extremes of excess and deficiency. This doctrine is left
necessarily vague, as Aristotle thinks that this mean varies from person to person. Essentially,
it consists of the observation that it is always possible to have too much or too little of a good
thing.

Energeia - This Greek word, which is the root of our word energy, is generally translated as
“activity.” However, it is not necessarily an activity in the sense that we might understand it.
For instance, Aristotle describes both happiness and contemplation as activities. In calling
happiness an energeia, Aristotle contrasts it with virtue, which he considers to be a hexis, or
disposition. That is, the virtues dispose us to behave in the correct manner. Actually behaving
according to the virtues, however, is not itself a virtue but rather the energeia of happiness.

Ethos - We can see that this term is the root of our word ethics. However, it is more
accurately translated as “character,” which gives us an important insight to understanding the
Ethics. Aristotle is not so much concerned with moralizing as he is with determining what
constitutes an admirable character.

Eudaimonia - Normally translated as “happiness,” eudaimonia also carries connotations of

success and fulfillment. For the Greeks, happiness is not an inner, emotional state, but the
activity, or energeia, of a successful person. The Greeks did not share our sharp distinction
between the public and the private, so for them, happiness is a public matter that can be
evaluated just as accurately by an observer as by the person being observed.
Hexis - Translated as “disposition,” hexis is the term Aristotle uses to qualify the virtues.
According to Aristotle, virtue is not something one actively does. Rather, virtue is a
disposition to behave in the right way.

Phronesis - Often translated as “prudence,” this term is perhaps better, but more
cumbersomely, translated as “practical wisdom.” Phronesis is an important intellectual virtue
that allows us to reason properly about practical matters. Phronesis consists in no small part
of an appropriate application of the practical syllogism.

Psyche - The root of our word psychology, psyche is generally translated as “soul,” though it
carries none of the spiritual connotations of the Christian use of that word. Psyche is that
unobservable property that distinguishes living things from nonliving things. The human
psyche consists of three major parts: the nutritive part, which it shares with both plants and
animals; the appetitive part, which it shares with only animals; and the rational part, which is
distinctively human.

Telos - This important term can be translated variously as “end,” “goal,” or “purpose” but
specific for the Greeks, telos is the purpose proper to ones nature. According to Aristotle, we
have a telos as humans, which it is our goal to fulfill. This telos is based on our uniquely
human capacity for rational thought. Aristotle’s view of humans having a telos based in our
rationality leads directly to his conclusion in Book X that contemplation is the highest human
good.
Themes, Ideas & Arguments

Virtue and Happiness

The word happiness in the Ethics is a translation of the Greek term eudaimonia, which carries
connotations of success and fulfillment. For Aristotle, this happiness is our highest goal.
However, Aristotle does not say that we should aim at happiness, but rather that we do aim at
happiness. His goal in the Ethics is not to tell us that we ought to live happy, successful lives,
but to tell us what this life consists of. Most people think of happiness as physical pleasure or
honor, but this is because they have an imperfect view of the good life.

The conception people have of happiness frequently does not line up with true happiness
because people are generally deficient in virtue. Virtue is a disposition to behave in the right
manner, which is inculcated from a young age. A person with the virtue of courage, for
instance, will not only show confidence in the face of fear, but will think of this courage as a
good thing. Behaving courageously will make the virtuous person happy and will be one part
of living a generally good life. By contrast, a person who has been poorly brought up and
exhibits the vice of cowardice will find happiness in the avoidance of danger and thus will
have an imperfect view of the good life.

Moral Education

A question of high importance in any investigation of ethics is how we can teach people to be
good. Aristotle is quite clear that he does not think virtue can be taught in a classroom or by
means of argument. His Ethics, then, is not designed to make people good, but rather to
explain what is good, why it is good, and how we might set about building societies and
institutions that might inculcate this goodness.

According to Aristotle, virtue is something learned through constant practice that begins at a
young age. We might understand his outlook better if we recognize the meaning of the word
arete, which is rendered as “virtue” in most English translations. This term more generally
means “excellence,” so a good horseman can exhibit arete in horsemanship without
necessarily implying any sort of moral worth in the horseman. It should be obvious to anyone
that excellence in horsemanship cannot be
learned simply by reading about horsemanship and hearing reasoned arguments for how best
to handle a horse. Becoming a good horseman requires steady practice: one learns to handle a
horse by spending a lot of time riding horses.

For Aristotle, there is no essential distinction between the kind of excellence that marks a
good horseman and the kind of excellence that marks a good person generally. Both kinds of
excellence require practice first and theoretical study second, so the teaching of virtue can be
only of secondary importance after the actual practice of it.

The Doctrine of the Mean

One of the most famous aspects of the Ethics is Aristotle’s doctrine that virtue exists as a
mean state between the vicious extremes of excess and deficiency. For example, the virtuous
mean of courage stands between the vices of rashness and cowardice, which represent excess
and deficiency respectively.

For Aristotle, this is not a precise formulation. Saying that courage is a mean between
rashness and cowardice does not mean that courage stands exactly in between these two
extremes, nor does it mean that courage is the same for all people. Aristotle repeatedly
reminds us in the Ethics that there are no general laws or exact formulations in the practical
sciences. Rather, we need to approach matters case by case, informed by inculcated virtue and
a fair dose of practical wisdom.
Aristotle’s claim that virtue can be learned only through constant practice implies that there
are no set rules we can learn and then obey. Instead, virtue consists of learning through
experience what is the mean path, relative to ourselves, between the vices we may be liable to
stumble into.
The Unity of the Virtues

For Aristotle, virtue is an all-or-nothing affair. We cannot pick and choose our virtues: we
cannot decide that we will be courageous and temperate but choose not to be magnificent.
Nor can we call people properly virtuous if they fail to exhibit all of the virtues.

Though Aristotle lists a number of virtues, he sees them all as coming from the same source.
A virtuous person is someone who is naturally disposed to exhibit all the virtues, and a
naturally virtuous disposition exhibits all the virtues equally.

Our word ethics descends from the Greek word ethos, which means more properly
“character.” Aristotle’s concern in the Ethics, then, is what constitutes a good character. All
the virtues spring from a unified character, so no good person can exhibit some virtues
without exhibiting them all.

The Importance of Friendship

Aristotle devotes two of the ten books of the Ethics to discussing friendship in all its forms.
This is hardly a digression from the main line of argument. Happiness, according to Aristotle,
is a public affair, not a private one, so with whom we share this happiness is of great
significance.

The city-states of ancient Greece were tightly knit communities. In the Politics, Aristotle
argues that we cannot fully realize our human nature outside the bounds of a Greek city-state.
The bonds that tie citizens together are so important that it would be unthinkable to suggest
that true happiness can be found in the life of a hermit.

The Life of Contemplation

In Book X, Aristotle ultimately concludes that contemplation is the highest human activity.
This is largely a consequence of his teleological view of nature, according to which the telos,
or goal, of human life is the exercise of our rational powers. In discussing the various
intellectual virtues, Aristotle extols wisdom as the highest, since it deals only with
unchanging, universal truths and rests on a synthesis of scientific investigation and the
intuitive understanding of the first principles of nature. The activity of wisdom is
contemplation, so contemplation must be the highest activity of
human life.