It is absolutely useless so far as ethics is

It is absolutely useless, so far as Ethics is concerned, to prove, as Mr Spencer tries to do,
that increase of pleasure coincides with increase of life, unless good means something different from either life or pleasure. He might just as well try to prove that an orange is yellow by
showing that it is always wrapped up in paper.
Virtue ethics is therefore implausible because if a human has the property of being
good and also has some other property, it’s absurd to say that that property is
identical to the property of being good .

Prescribes Wrong Action For The Non-Virtuous [~:20]
Virtue ethics prescribes wrong action for non-virtuous people and is therefore self-
defeating.
Harman 99
Gilbert Harman, “Virtue Ethics without Character Traits,” Gilbert Harman Web site,
.
One obvious objection to the standard form of virtue ethics is to its account of the relation between what a person ought morally to do and what it is to be a virtuous person. The objectionable
claim is
[The argument] that what one ought
morally
to do
in a given situation
is
to do
what a virtuous person
would do
in that situation. The objection is that this
cannot cover all cases, because someone a nonvirtuous person
will be in a situation that a virtuous person would never be in
.[11] To some extent the point is acknowledged in the idea that a
person who is not yet virtuous should try to develop the virtues. That is something a virtuous person does not need to do, so it is a way that the non-virtuous person should act that is not just
to imitate the way a virtuous person would act. But there are various other cases as well.
For example, a person who has done
something
wrong
often ought
morally
to apologize to those affected
by his or her action.
However, a
n ideally
virtuous person
would not have done the wrong
thing in the first place
and so would have nothing to apologize for.
Similarly,
consider a person who is aware that he or she tends to be weak-willed and to give into temptation. Should such a person make plans with others that will be undermined if the person gives
into temptation in the midst of carrying out the plans? Perhaps not; but an ideally virtuous person would not suffer from weakness of the will and could make plans with others without fear of
ruining everything by giving into temptation at just the wrong moment.
In this
sort of
case a person should precisely not do what an
ideally virtuous person would do because that would
in a way to
pretend that he or she had the
sort of
character that he or she does not have.

C haracter Not Related To Action [~:50]
Virtue ethics assumes a connection between character traits and the way people act
i.e. a virtuous individual would act because of his or her good character. However, this
is empirically a false attribution, which means virtue ethics can’t determine right
action and is therefore an empty ethical theory.