U + D are act centred
VE is agent centred
what does this mean
- U+D=moral value of acts
- VE = character of a person and what it means to be a good or bad person
utilitarianism
an act is considered good if its consequences bring about the best possible outcome for the greatest number of people
deontology
an act is considered good or bad depending on the intentions of the individual doing the action
- must be an act done out of duty
what does aristotle claim is the final cause for humans
- to live a happy life with virtue and reasoning
- eudiamonia/flourishing
—> the only thing people desire in and of itself
what are the 4 causes - chalice example
- material cause - what an object is made out of - silver
- formal cause - essence of the object - chalice shape
- final cause - end goal - use in religious ceremony/to drink out of
- efficient cause - what made the object - silversmith
why is Aristotle’s claim of eudaimonia objective rather than subjective
-it is something we aim for in virtue of being a human being
- we cannot choose to have this final end
- it doesn’t change with time
what are eudoxus’ 4 reasons for why pleasure is the ultimate good
- all things aim at pleasure
- all things avoid the opposite of pleasure - pain
- we choose pleasure for its own sake
- any other good can be improved upon if you add pleasure
how does Aristotle argue against eudoxus’ 4th point that any other good can be improved on by adding pleasure
- pleasure is not the ultimate good because it can be added on and improved
- eudaimonia cannot be improved upon
- animals also experience pleasure so it is not unique to humans
- impossible to get pleasure from immoral acts —> sadistic torture
- so someone whose life is filled with pleasure and happiness may have a bad character
what is a function
that which a thing does which characterises it as that thing
- function of an eye is to see
- something functions well if it can perform this activity well
what is the function of a human being and how does this link to our final cause to flourish - Aristotle
- to be guided by reason
- the function of something allows it to fulfil its purpose so being guided by reason will help us flourish
what is the formal version of the function argument
P1)P2)P3)C1)P4)C2)
P1) the function of a thing is its characteristic form of activity
P2) being alive or perception cannot be the function of humans as this is shared wit animals
P3) being guided by reason is distinctive to humans
C1) therefore the function of a human being is to be guided by reason
P4)a human is good if they perform this function well
C2) therefore, a good human lives a life guided by reason
what is practical wisdom and how does this link to our function/final purpose
- PW = the ability to make the right decision at the right time in the right context in relation to the right people, with the right means, achieving the right ends
—> deliberately vague so it can be easily applicated to many situations - ability to make appropriate decisions in each situation means being well guided by reason
what is a virtue with an example and what is a vice
- virtues aid the function of an object, vices stop it
- virtue of a knife is sharpness
- virtues are positive characteristic dispositions
- dispositions are tendencies to act in a specific way
what is Aristotles concept of habituation
- habituation is the process of ethical education that a person does through
- involves practicing virtues until they form dispositions (tendencies to act in a particular way)
- also involves practicing practical wisdom, learning how to deliberate well and make appropriate choices –> involves finding role models for guidance and to imitate them
how does moral responsibility relate to practical wisdom and habituation
- moral responsibility means that a moral agent can be praised or blamed for the actions they make
- the practically wise person, who has developed their skill or making virtuous decisions, is able to reflect on their actions and express regret for when they do bad things
- they can learn from this –> informing and developing their habituation
what does it mean for a definition to be circular
- they contain the word being defined in the definition
- tautologies
why are circular definitions undesirable
they do not tell us anything more about the term being described
how is virtue ethics accused of being circular
virtue ethics defines a virtuous person as someone who does virtuous acts and a virtuous act as something done by a virtuous person but this is just describing a virtuous person so it is like a circle
- hard to know how one can find virtuous people to be role models for habituation
how does Julia Annas defend virtue ethics from the circularity objection and why is virtue ethics still not able to respond adequately
- virtuous acts are not simply what a virtuous person does
- acts are voluntary and lie in the mean between vices of deficiency and excess
- people are defined as those who have practical wisdom and live well/flourish/achieve eudaemonia
- however only virtuous people understand eudaemonia/practical wisdom/the doctrine of the mean so even getting a non-circular definition does not solve this issue
what is the example for the objection that virtues do not necessarily lead to flourishing
- a woman is a doctor in a foreign land, working to save lives and relieve suffering
- she is often tired and ill, does not enjoy her work and dies of an infection
- she seems to be a morally good person by was she flourishing?
- she expresses virtues –> selflessness and compassion but is not flourishing so some virtues do not lead to flourishing
how does Julia Annas defend virtue ethics from the objection that some virtues do not necessarily lead to flourishing
- the objection misunderstands eudaemonia –> it is not simply self interest as this suggests egoism
- VE = commitment to others and to value others beyond ones own narrow interest
explain how sometimes virtues may clash and how this is an issue for virtue ethics
- VE does not provide clear guidance on how to make decisions and work out clashes of virtues
- relying on subjective judgement is not helpful when someone has not developed practical wisdom yet
- we cannot get better at deliberating if we do not know what a right decision looks like
explain how VE does not provide clear guidance on how to act
- no rules or clear examples of what is good or bad or how to act
- instead one should develop practical wisdom via habituation to learn how to express virtues and reason well, thus aiming to flourish, but this is developed over a lifetime
