Virtue Ethics

Virtue Ethics - Sam Black PHIL 120 LECTURES ON VIRTUE...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Sam Black, PHIL 120 LECTURES ON VIRTUE ETHICS Background on Virtue Ethics There is no agreed on definition of virtue ethics but only on part of what that view holds: i) Good character is central to ethics (what Mayo calls an ‘ethics of Being vs Doing’) ii) Moral pluralism: there is more than one valid moral principle (contrast Kant and Utilitarianism) iii) Uncodifiability: a person’s final duty – what their moral duty is all- things-considered – cannot be inferred from valid moral principles, but involves the exercise of judgment. (The opposite extreme is illustrated by a legal system that codifies rules about which acts are not permitted, and permits everything else. A legal system is not an ethical theory. Utilitarian and Kantian ethics provide examples of ethical theories where people can deduce what their duty is all- things-considered from a single principle.) These claims are assumed to be related as follows: (a) there is no alternative to relying on judgment because multiplicity of conflicting principles make it impossible to compute final duties using a formula that can be publicly scrutinized, (b) only people with good character will be able to reliably identify their moral duties. A.I: Mayo Illustration: Mayo – what ought I to do? i) Duty is connected to acting in ways characteristic of a person with good character (a virtuous person): “Instead of quoting a rule, we quote a quality of character, a virtue: we may say ‘Be brave,’ or ‘Be patient,’ or ‘Be lenient.’ We may even say ‘Be a man’: if I am in doubt, say, whether to take a risk, and someone says ‘Be a man,’ meaning a morally sound man, in this case a man of sufficient 1
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
courage.’ (121) Mayo claims VE ‘gains a practical simplicity which offsets the greater logical simplicity of the ethics of principle’. (121) Expl: VE lacks ‘logical simplicity’ b/c a person’s final duties cannot be deduced from a single principle. VE has ‘practical simplicity’ b/c presumably all members of our society have a grasp of what’ involved in being ‘patient,’ ‘lenient,’ ‘merciful,’ ‘kind,’ ‘a man,’ etc. The def’n of right action according to VE: An action is right if that action would be chosen in a circumstance C by a virtuous person reflecting on what to do in C. Note, that this proposal is formal and empty until we know two things: i) What kind of character traits does a virtuous person possess? ii) What weight do they assign to different traits? ii) What kind of person should I be like?: Mayo -- ‘saints and heroes’ Mayo claims we should be guided by an ‘ideal-type of character’ which can be a fiction or an actual person representative of that ideal. These examples comprise ‘saints and heroes’ and include: Aristotle’s man of practical wisdom [if you can figure out who s/he is], ‘the American way of life,’ ‘Socrates,’ ‘Christ,’ ‘Buddha,’ ‘St. Francis,’ etc. (122).
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 07/15/2010 for the course PHIL 120 taught by Professor Evantiffany during the Spring '08 term at Simon Fraser.

Page1 / 8

Virtue Ethics - Sam Black PHIL 120 LECTURES ON VIRTUE...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online