Virtue Theory Essay

Virtue Theory Essay

The Virtue Theory is one of the three main hypotheses in normative ethics, which in turn emphasizes benefits in identifying moral persona and what is good. That focuses on the particular a good person, rather than what makes a good action. In other words, The Virtue Theory is an agent-based method of ethics, which asks this kind of question regarding being good: “What kind of person should I always be? ” This is certainly in contrast to the other two approaches, Utilitarianism and Kantanism, which ask this question concerning being good: “What should I do? ” Those two theories happen to be act-based and therefore are concerned with obligations or rules, and the effects of activities respectively, rather than defining the appropriate telos, or perhaps purpose of guy, such as The Virtue Theory. Relating to Aristotle, who founded the Advantage Theory, problem of “What kind of person should I become? ” can be answered simply by defining the function of man. Therefore , the function of guy is defined as living a rational life with excellence within a well-reasoned approach (Aristotle 251). Aristotle also states that the telos of man, or perhaps end/purpose, should be to achieve eudaimonia, or delight, fulfillment, and a complete existence (Aristotle 252). In order to accomplish that function a single must live a virtuous life or maybe a life of excellence. Virtue then, can be described as disposition needed in order to excel at one’s function. It is more or less a state of character, which can be the balance level or indicate between two extremes. Four primary or time-honored virtues are present: wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice. It is important to note that Aristotle claims that virtue is not only a feeling or maybe a capacity, but a state of character (Aristotle 254). Virtue is not just a feeling because we are not praised or punished for having feelings. Additionally it is not a ability because basically having the power to feel a particular way does not make that good or bad (Aristotle 254). Consequently , Aristotle says, “every virtue causes the possessors being in a great state and to perform their very own functions well” (Aristotle 254). For example , bravery is considered a virtue since it is the middle stage between the extreme conditions of courage. Courage is the right amount or mean, and achieve that equilibrium is to be positive in valor. One extreme of bravery would be cowardice, which is the lack or lack of courage, and one who is a coward would be considered deficient in valor. The different extreme, foolhardiness, is the excess or express of having excessive courage. Both extremes, either the deficit or excess of courage happen to be vices as the right amount of courage is usually not achieved. In taking into consideration what is virtuous or certainly not, Aristotle makes a distinction the mean among two vices, excess and deficiency, is usually relative to us (Aristotle 255-256). He uses an example saying that although ten pounds of foodstuff is a lot somebody to eat and two pounds is too little, the suggest of six pounds may well still be a lot of or not enough depending on the individual (Aristotle 255). Also, Aristotle stresses that in order to reach the benefits, one need to practice and develop practices especially for a young age. He says that, for you to become courageous, one must perform brave acts. Our company is born with all the potential to turn into courageous, nevertheless only through action is going to we actually hone each of our development and be virtuous in courage. Aristotle offers practical advice on ways to accomplish the mean. He says that occasionally one extreme is more compared with than the additional extreme in relation to the imply. Basically, that of the two extremes one is the “lesser of two evils” (Aristotle 258). In addition , he relates that we get a tendency to become more inclined toward among the extremes and in order to hit the mean or virtue, we should counteract that tendency to obtain balance (Aristotle 259). Lastly, Aristotle claims, “there are many ways to take error…but there may be only one way to be right. ” Which means that finding the indicate is tough and achieving as a result should be lauded and privileged (Aristotle 255). David Norton makes reference to Urmson’s “Saints and Heroes” to call attention to and rectify the challenge of supererogatory acts in relation to The Advantage Theory. A hero will be someone who shows exceptional valor and a saint someone who exhibits outstanding tolerance. As much as a hero is concerned, having exceptional bravery seems to be having more bravery than what is prescribed and so in relation to The Virtue Theory, would be regarded as an excess of courage, and therefore a vice, not a virtue. This kind of however does not apply because a main character is acknowledged for “going above and beyond the decision of duty” by executing these supererogatory acts. Norton seeks to resolve this issue by proclaiming that a main character regards his actions as his obligation and therefore having exceptional courage is just considered as the right amount of courage according to the hero (Norton 303). This may seem to fit in with Aristotle’s perspective that the equilibrium point among extremes is relative to us. Norton as well states that moral development and social roles allow for duty to grow in regard to The Advantage Theory. Put simply, what is typical at afterwards stages of ethical development can seem supererogatory with respect to previous stages of moral development, and the distinction between duty and supererogatory adjustments through ethical development (Norton 304). To conclude, The Virtue Theory of ethics may be accepted because it takes into account what aspects of one’s life need to be fulfilled in order to be moral. I think, it better solves the dilemma showing how to live a moral existence by seeking to answer the question of what kind of person one should be, rather than basically what activities they should have. The Virtue Theory seeks to have us live lives of brilliance by choosing the mean of various states of character, which can be virtues just like wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice. By using this approach to ethics, 1 will fulfill one’s telos, which is delight, fulfillment, and life, or perhaps eudaimonia. Performs Cited Aristotle. “Virtue Integrity. ” Meaningful Philosophy, A Reader, Third Edition. Ed. Louis S. Pojman. Indiana, IN: Hackett, 2003. 249-259 Norton, David L. “Moral Minimalism as well as the Development of Meaning Character. ” Moral Idea, A Audience, Third Copy. Ed. John P. Pojman. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett, the year 2003. 296-307.

Related Essays