We discussed Utilitarianism and Kantianism in the previous two chapters. Utilitarianism is a part of teleogical ethics. It is one form of consequentialism in which an action is judged based on its consequences, whether they are good or bad. Kantianism is a kind of deontology. It judges actions as good or bad based on whether or not they are in accordance with the moral agent’s duty.
There are other approaches to ethics besides utilitarianism and deontology. One such approach is virtue ethics which goes back to Aristotle and which has seen a revival in late twentieth century. Virtue ethics propounds the view that while doing right things is important, it is equally or more important to be a virtuous person.
Aristotle is regarded as the first systematic proponent of Virtue ethics. Virtue can be defined as an excellence of character which leads one to act in a morally praiseworthy manner. A person who possesses the virtue of kindness will behave kindly towards others. He will not act kindly mainly because he thinks that it is his duty do so or because he calculates that acting kindly will maxmimise total utility in society. He acts kindly because he possesses the virtue of kindness. According to virtue ethics, the truly moral person is a virtuous person. He has internalized virtues and has a moral character.
Vice is the opposite of virtue. It is an acquired weakness of character which makes one act in a morally blameworthy manner. In this way, bad acts arise from one’s moral weakness.
Virtue theory makes a distinction between moral virtues and non-moral virtues. Moral virtues include kindness, benevolence, compassion, honesty, conscientiousness and gratitude. Examples of non-moral virtues are self-control, patience, courage, endurance, perseverance and so on. Non- moral virtues can be used for bad ends. For example, one may show great courage in robbing a bank. Moral virtues promote a moral life.
We have already discussed the chief elements of Aristotle’s ethics. To recapitulate briefly, they consist of the following:
¤ The aim of men should be to achieve ‘eudaimonia” which can be interpreted as happiness or flourishing.
¤ As social creatures, men can achieve this goal by living in communities.
¤ As rational creatures, men have to lead a life of reason.
¤ Such life requires cultivation of moral virtues and intellectual virtues. This involves continuous practice.
¤ Virtue is a golden mean between two extremes and it can be found through practical wisdom. Aristotle argues that developing a moral character by becoming a virtuous person is more important thanknowledgeof moralprinciples.Aristotleacknowledgestheroleof rulesandprinciplesasguides to action. However, the virtuous person will observe the rules voluntarily and without effort. Mere knowledge of moral principles and accepting them intellectually is not sufficient to make a person moral.
Virtue Ethics and Rule-based Ethics
Virtue ethics can be contrasted with rule-based ethics like utilitarianism. In rule based ethics, the moral agent appears simply in the role of someone just applying rules mechanically. Rule based ethicsignorehis motive in wanting to be moral.Virtueethicstrace hismoral actions to his motivation arising from his virtuous character. Moral individuals are not simply those adept at seeing what courses of action conform to categorical imperative or lead to the greatest happiness of the greatest number. Virtue ethics portrays moral persons as those who genuinely take pleasure in doing right things. They are not unwillingly propelled into good acts by a grim sense of duty or stoic resignation. Such acts come naturally to them. In this way, virtue ethicsgives a more attractive perspective to the acts of virtuous people. While it is important to follow moral courses of action, it is more important to be a genuinely moral person.
Weaknesses of Virtue Ethics
Notwithstanding the above attractive features of virtue ethics, critics have also pointed to its weaknesses. Virtue ethics assumes that men are naturally good or at least are morally neutral. Hence, they can acquire a moral character through practice. But in some traditions (e.g. Christianity) men are considered as sinful and evil and that their redemption depends on divine grace. If this view is accepted, virtue ethics becomes weakened.
It also argued that often men lack the knowledge necessary in order to become virtuous. In this regard, we may consider the case of ancient Greek ethics. Socrates, Plato and Aristotle produced profound and sublime ethical systems. But they have accepted the then prevalent system of slavery. To this extent, their ideas were historically conditioned and failed to transcend the contemporaneous conceptions.
Another difficulty is that even after cultivating a moral character, one may not know what virtue involves in a particular situation. Thus kindly persons may show misplaced generosity to undeserving people who may not really be in need. In such situations, one may have to rely on certain rules and principles.
Finally, there may be differences on what is and what is not a virtue. Aristotle considered pride as a virtue. While propounding this view, he had in mind the nobility and the military classes. Their moral codes placed emphasis on valour and taking pride in military traditions. However, Christianity regards pride as a sin.
In spite of the above weaknesses of virtue ethics, it provides the needed corrective to moral perspectives based on rule based ethics such as consequentialism and deontology.
Natural law ethics provides another important perspective on Ethics. Its origins go back to Aristotle and the Stoics. In Greek tradition, there was a tendency to set up an opposition between nature and society and contrast natural laws with social conventions. Natural law philosophy was fully developed by the medieval philosopher St. Thomas Aquinas. We have discussed an important part of natural law ethics---the doctrine of double effects---in the previous chapter. We will discuss the views of Thomas Aquinas on law in the sixth chapter. In this chapter, we outline the central features of natural law ethics.
Aquinassaysthateverynaturalobject has a natural purposeor function.Forexample,thepurpose of heart is to circulate blood. When natural objects perform their purposes, the resulting situation is wholesome, and one which has a natural value. But when natural objects are unable to perform their natural functions or achieve their natural purposes, the resulting situation is undesirable.
Alllivingthingssharethe natural value of preservinglife. Livingthingsultimatelydie.But so long as they are alive, their parts serve the purpose of maintaining life. As life is a natural value, attempts to preserve it are good. Duty of preserving human life (and indeed all life) is basic to natural law ethics and sets it apart from other approaches to ethics. It is the main tenet of its morality. Morality imposes an obligation to preserve the lives of other people and of human species in general. It opposes those practices that prevent procreation such as abortion and sterilization. Roman Catholic religious principles are mainly based on the theological doctrines of Aquinas. Natural law ethics are the main reason why Roman Catholic Church opposes artificial means of birth control. These means defeat the natural function or purpose of sexual intercourse.
Another important tenet which Aquinas propounds is that human beings as rational creatures have a natural purpose of leading a life of reason. They need to distinguish between the rational and the irrational. Men have this ability. Rational actions which promote life and reason are morally right. Irrational actions are morally wrong.
Many conclusions follow from the above conception. As preservation of human species is part of man’s natural function, men should do such things which promote the proper function of humanity. As human beings flourish in a well-ordered society, morality requires that we do things whichpromote social order. As a result,telling truth, keepingpromises, and doing such otherthings as promote mutual trust become moral duties.
For a similar reason, it becomes a moral duty of people to support institutions such as marriage and civil government, which promote social stability. Aquinas argues, as we shall see later, that people need not support a government which is unable to perform its function of maintaining social order and harmony. Natural ethics lends support to duties from the perspective of maintaining social stability. Thus, property rights of others have to be respected. General social welfare has to be promoted by helping those in desperate need.
Natural law ethics lead to moral norms which are similar to those which follow from utilitarianism and deontology. However, natural law ethics derives its moral principles for the natural value of life and the need for stable social life. It does notrefer to utility or duty as a driver of morality.
Natural law ethics concedes that in certain circumstances one may have to deprive individuals of their life. If a mad killer is going on rampage, police will be justified in killing him. The action of police will be justified on the basis of the principle of forfeiture. What this means is that the killer loses his natural right to life because of his going on a killing spree. No justification on utilitarian grounds is given for the action of police. We may mention that war, which leads to enormous loss of human life, is also justified in certain circumstances in natural law ethics. The idea of just war has been propounded by Augustine. It is essentially a defensive action taken to protect the nation against the aggressor.
Criticisms against natural law ethics
The doctrine of double effects is an offshoot of natural law ethics. It envisages situations which involve damage (including loss of life) happening in the course of a justifiable action. We have already discussed thisdoctrine andthecriticisms levelled against it.
Now, we will outline the other criticisms against natural law ethics. Promoting natural purpose and functions may not always be desirable. Sting of female mosquitoes spreads malaria. Various measures are taken to destroy the habitats of these mosquitoes. But such measures may seem to violate natural law ethics. Another example could be the removal of poisonous weeds.
Manyfeaturesof natureareunattractive.Forexample,animalkingdomconsistsof manypredators and their prey. Killing and violence mark natural life. This led British poet Tennyson to speak of “nature red in tooth and claw”. According to Darwin, natural evolution of species involves struggle forexistencebetweenspecies.Oftentheweak membersareeliminated intheprocess.Hence, natural processes may not yield morally acceptable principles.
Another problem with natural law theories is that they pick and choose what they regard as natural. All natural organisms decay and die. Death is also a part of nature. But does it mean that we should promote or hasten death in certain circumstances? Natural law ethics oppose this suggestion. Many will regard their position as morally justified. But it may be inconsistent with their approach of favouring natural processes and functions.
We havediscussedthe principal systems of ethics.Thereare a few otherstrandswhichneed a mention. Many thinkers argue that morality is a matter of human intuition. Intuition is an unexplainable faculty yieldingcorrect moral judgements. We will discuss this aspect further whileconsidering conscience as a guide to morality.
Philosophers also differ on whether morality is derived from human reason or human sentiments. This discussion distinguishes sharply between the reasoning faculties and emotional feelings of human beings. There is little doubt that many human virtues are rooted in emotions. We discuss these aspects in detail in the seventh chapter. However, we may note at this stage that rationality and reasoning are important in critically evaluating moral principles. It may be risky to rely only on sentiments. At times emotional responses turn out to be undesirable.
Summary of Virtue Ethics
• Virtue ethics propounds the view that while doing right things is important, it is equally or more important to be a virtuous person.
• According to virtue ethics, the truly moral person is a virtuous person. He has internalised virtues and has a moral character.
• Aristotlegave the first systematic account of virtue ethics.
Virtue ethics portrays moral persons as those who genuinely take pleasure in doing right things.
• In rule based ethics, the moral agent appears simply in the role of someone just applying rules mechanically.
Following criticisms can be made against virtue ethics.
• Virtue ethics assumes that men are naturally good or at least are morally neutral---an assumption which is questionable.
• Often men lack the knowledge necessary in order to become virtuous.
• There may be differences on what is and what not a virtue.
• Even after cultivating a moral character, one may not know what virtue involves in a particular situation.