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
does a person
does arrive
a person arriveat
at her highestgood?
her highest 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 It is an excellence in knowing the right conduct in
the fundamental principles and truths carrying out a particular act.
that govern the universe.
One can attain a wisdom that can provide us
It helps one understand in general the with a guide on how to behave in our daily lives.
meaning 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 Knowing the right thing

inherent to a person to do when one is
confronted by a choice
is not easy.
One needs to develop this This is why when it comes to life
knowledge by exercising the choices, one can seek the advice
faculty of practical reason in her of elders in the community, those
daily life. In attaining practical who gained rich life experiences
wisdom, she may initially make and practical wisdom, because
mistakes on how reason is applied they would be able to assist
to a particular moral choice or someone’s moral deliberation.
action. But through these mistakes, Parents can advice their children
she will be able to sustain practical how to behave in front of family
wisdom to help steer another’s members and relatives. Senior
ability to know morally right choices members of the community like
and action. In other words, she is priests, counsellors, and leaders
able to mature and grow in her may also guide the young
capacity on knowing what to do members on how relationships with
and living a morally upright life. others are fostered.
 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 “the ability to control oneself, in “not settling an issue.”
thinking 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 “lack of bravery”
consequences of one's actions; frightens one.”
rashness.”

Prodigality Liberality Meanness

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