Virtue Ethics

7. Can Virtue Ethics provide an adequate and free-standing account of morality?

Virtue Ethics maintains that the best way to achieve good moral standing is to develop an “excellence of character.” Meaning, determining the right course of action requires looking at how you ought to “be.” This contrasts other normative theories which instead identify what you ought to “do.” It is for this reason that consequentialists and deontologists often attempt to discredit the ability of virtue ethicists in providing an adequate, free-standing account of morality. It can be seen however, that virtue ethics can stand on its own as a moral theory which is at least as adequate as any other.

The main advantage for virtue ethicists is that they have no set rules to follow. Where followers of Kant have to tell the truth in all situations, a student of virtue has the freedom to tell lies if the circumstances are right. If an enquiring murderer came knocking, lying would be a sound practice of justice; a moral virtue. Some would argue that a conflict of virtues arises here; following justice would lead you to lie whereas following honesty would lead to telling the truth. It can be seen however, that there is no actual conflict. The perception of conflict only arises due to the person’s lack of virtue (Hursthouse 706). If he masters honesty and justice then which virtue to follow should become clear to him. However, this seems unlikely as becoming a master of any virtue is no easy task.

The primary source of virtue ethics is Aristotle. His theory on virtues is aimed at attaining eudaimonia; sometimes called flourishing. He proposes that the only way to reach this state of happiness is through attaining valuable character traits which he calls virtues (674). Intellectual virtues, like wisdom, grow over time and can be taught to the individual. However,, moral virtues – like temperance – cannot be taught, they are acquired early on in one’s life and must be practiced thoroughly...