Morality and Taking the Truth and Goodness for Granted - Essay Example

Morality and Taking the "Truth" and "Goodness" for Granted Morality is a general term in society used in varied circumstances and situations thereby signifying its importance in human life. It has varied interpretations thereby varying from one region to another. The general meaning of the word entails the act of identifying, recommending, and defending ideas of right or wrong behavior, which often tackles disputes attributed to moral diversity (Athanassoulis 1). Thus, ethics or morality attempts to resolve issues concerned with human moral concepts such as evil and good, virtue and vice, right, and wrong, truth and lie as well as crime and justice. Despite presence of divergent views with regard to ethical standards of morals, there are general standards followed by many societies and which every person who aspires to be considered ethical must adhere to. The divergent views on standards of morality have been influenced by presence of various viewpoints and perceptions on ethics and morality presented by a number of philosophers. For instance, philosophers such as Aristotle, Hursthouse, Gilligan, Alcoff, Nietzsche, and Foucault have developed perceptions and ideas concerning morality. Some of the notions concur or expound the other while some contradicts and criticize each other. However, this paper examines and discusses Aristotle and Hursthouse’s views on morality with the aim of developing a deeper understanding of this important concept. According to Aristotle, moral virtue otherwise known as excellence of character refers to the disposition of acting excellently developed by a person either partly due to his upbringing or because of his habit or routine of action (Athanassoulis 1). He argues that the character emerges from habit or practice and is voluntary since it arises from various individual actions that are controlled voluntarily. Moreover, Aristotle asserts that every character of excellence lies between the extremes and thus lies between a deficiency and an excess. The extremes deviate in one way or another from the virtuous character state (Athanassoulis 1). Therefore, the character of excellence arises from the doctrine of the mean and this is among the best and famous aspects of Aristotle’s ethics. The nature of feeling and emotions of some kind also arises from the doctrine of the mean and to some degree depends on one’s upbringing. Thus, some people despite intending to do the right thing never live to their choice and this condition is referred to as akrasia; lack of self – mastery, incontinence, or weakness of will (Athanassoulis 1).this situation is common since individuals take morality and other aspects of ethics for granted. Aristotle in his ethical and moral and works considers eudaimonia as the utmost human good and thus the excellent exercise or action of the intellect. Therefore, he considers a virtuous person as one possessing all moral virtues as well as excellences of character. These excellences of character entails magnanimity or having great soul, practicing or showing wisdom, remaining just, having virtue of remaining a true friend as well as possessing the nobility of a gentleman (Athanassoulis 1). Aristotle narrows his work towards the reasoning, which must be part of human’s highest functioning. Thus, an individual who practices or emulates reasoning remains the happiest since he or she fulfils the nature or purpose as it is in the rational soul. Hursthouse is another philosophy who supports Aristotelian tradition and ideas on morality, truth, and good. She considers virtue ethics in terms of a human being who possesses all ethical virtues of character thus lacking defects and vices of a character (Yorke 1). This is because such traits are natural or inherent in the species. Thus, value ethics or morality evaluates or examines certain actions or behaviors as right or wrong as well as establishing moral rules to offer guidance in responding or acting in various circumstances. She supports good human life that is referred to as eudaimonia. Hursthouse advocates for a strong theory of morality based on rightness in good character traits which are established on practical reasoning, right attitude or truths, right actions or passions, right thoughts or reactions of the virtuous or non virtuous among others (Yorke 1). For example, she considers abortion on certain grounds such as situational setting, goals, purposes, reasons, as well as consequences based on good character traits as well as related in virtue – vice terms. Hurshouse, therefore, attributes rightness of an action based on good character traits as well as eudaimonia or happiness. According to her, an action performed by a person of good character is right since such an individual aspired for happiness when performing the act. Therefore, an individual with good character will do right things since such actions will contribute to his or her happiness. Both Aristotle and Hursthouse believe that every virtue of a character produces a positive rule of action while every defect or vice of character generates a negative rule. It is, therefore, true that the virtue enables one to tell the truth, keeping promises, being kind, act meanly, break promises, as well as lie (Yorke 1). Aristotle and Hursthouse warn us against taking morality, truth, and goodness for granted. This is because despite a person assuming that he is virtuous and therefore every action that he does will be moral, there are certain instances, which the situation reverses. Thus, a completely virtuous person might find herself in a predicament whereby any action done is right in action – assessment sense such as in Sophie’s case. In the case, a mother has to choose which of her kids is to killed immediately and the one to be saved. In case she declines, then all of the kids are to be killed right away. In such situation, there could be the right decision in the action- guiding sense that a fully virtuous agent would make in such a similar scenario. However, such action might not be right in the action – assessment sense as it will never be all right (Yorke 1). Consequently, there is a better way to distinguish perfect practical rationality thereby guaranteeing that a fully virtuous person will act in the right manner or do the right thing (Athanassoulis 1). Moreover, a virtuous person cannot assume that he will always do the right thing that makes him happy since, in most cases, it can turn out as wrong. For example, a virtuous person can perform an action, which he thinks is right and will lead to his happiness. However, such an action generates happiness to the person yet cause misery on the other thus compromising the value of virtuous or excellent character (Yorke 1). In such a case, the person could have taken goodness for granted thus leading to such faulty decision. Moreover, since excellent character is derived from the mean or average of the extremes, one should be cautious since he might choose or behave in a manner that deviates from the doctrine of the mean. In a particular situation, one might still employ reasoning when making decisions yet the result would create unwise decisions. When such a person decides to make a claim he thinks constitutes the truth, as he believes in his virtuous and excellent character, the claim might not be the truth. This is because he took the truth for granted in the pretext of seeking or fulfilling his goal and attaining happiness. Such individuals, therefore, despite intending to do the right thing never live to their choice since they take virtuousness for granted thus the akrasia condition (Athanassoulis 1). Living to one’s choice is, therefore, demanding and virtuous people need not take things for granted as they can be misguided into doing or committing a vice. In conclusion, Aristotle and Hursthouse provide insightful and important views and notions on morality. Through their concept of reasoning that forms the highest functioning part of a human being, they impart knowledge on morality that should be emulated by individuals. These promote good behavior and conduct in society thereby promoting understanding, proper life, and thus peaceful life. By ensuring observance of morals and ethical living, the society becomes complete as it results in improved living standards. However, virtuous people need to cautious as they might assume that every action they do is right yet in the real sense it might be wrong. Such actions might not constitute the average mean falling between the extremes. Such acts might take morality, truth, as well as goodness for granted thereby compromising the intention or purpose of virtuous ethics and morality theory. Works Cited Athanassoulis, Nafasika. “Virtue Ethics”. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved April 26, 2014 from http://www.iep.utm.edu/virtue/ Yorke, Christopher. “Moral action vs virtuous characters: Hursthouse’s Virtue Ethics and the problem of personal transformation”. Academia .edu. Retrieved April 25, 2014 from http://www.academia.edu/3761462/Moral_Actions_vs._Virtuous_Characters_Hursthouse s_Virtue_Ethics_and_the_Problem_of_Personal_Transformation Read More