Virtue Ethics and Morality - Essay Example

Virtue Ethics Introduction Virtue ethics is an ethical system that emphasizes on the character of a person. For this reason, a virtuous person would make every effort to do the right thing in a certain situation, under given circumstances (Hursthouse 5). In this case, the virtuous person will be able to exercise character traits that are likely to lead to the prosperity of his or her existence. It might be proper to support the argument that doing what would increase happiness, as well as performing one’s duty are guides achieving morally appropriate behavior (Temkin 4). With these considerations, it is possible to indicate that the pursuit of happiness, through performing the right acts, and the performance of a specific duty are some of the things that individuals should be able to follow. This consideration emphasizes on virtue ethics, which is necessary for the determination of the right way to act, and it should also be the good way. Ethics might be identified as standards that determine the conduct of an individual, and it is indicative of behavior based on virtues and moral duties. It is the character noticeable in the habits of an individual, and it would be good for an individual to embrace it. It is possible to determine that ethics arises from the principles of the right or wrong behavior in consideration. On the other hand, a moral dilemma is a situation that indicates a given level of conflict between values and choices of action that an individual needs to make decisions on. This paper looks into the virtue of honesty, thereby focusing on the act of dishonesty as a common vice that exists in individuals. Additionally, the paper presents a discussion on how to develop a solution to the moral dilemma, as well as its relation to different approaches to ethics such as the deontological and consequentialist approach. Virtue ethics and morality Some of the theories in virtue ethics include Eudaimonism, ethics of care and agent-based theories. The theories get inspiration from Aristotle, who gives emphasis to on the character traits of an individual, which are derivations of the individual’s internal tendencies that should be nurtured. Consequently, it is feasible to conclude that dishonesty is a moral dilemma that describes a person’s natural tendencies, whose development might lead to the stability of the character in the person. This argument realizes the fact that a virtuous person exhibits kindness or other values across different situations in his or her lifetime, not because he or she would want to gain favor or it is his or her duty, but because it is his or her character trait. Another vital component to consider is the fact that a number of factors beyond an individual’s control are necessary for the cultivation of the right virtues (Temkin 30). These factors include the individual’s friends, family, education and the society as a whole. The application of virtue theories requires flexibility, which follows Aristotle’s ethical doctrine that focuses on avoiding “the extremes.” Aristotle advocates for moderation in the development of the right virtues. Considering Aristotle’s approach, it would be in order to determine that the nature of some of the human actions is necessary for accepting moral responsibility (Hursthouse 35). For instance, the moral evaluation of honesty takes as fact its attribution of responsibility in the human agent. However, there are some instances when the attribution might be inappropriate and for this reason, responsible action should be voluntary. Nevertheless, the action of honesty might appear to be involuntary if produced by an external force. This consideration is because the act of honesty might be compromised by an external duress and the individual in this case is not responsible for any act of dishonesty. Consequently, it is not possible to blame the individual morally for the dishonest action. On the other hand, there is a possibility of determining that dishonesty, when performed ignorantly can also be categorized as involuntary and the individual in this case might not take the blame of being dishonest (Temkin 32). The aspect of volition relies on existing deliberations of choices among some of the existing alternative actions that an individual might be in a position to perform. In the deliberative process, the actions of the individual are evaluated in light of what is good, after which the individual takes the best choice among the existing deliberations. On this note, it is possible to determine that the moral actions of an individual are within his or her power to perform or avoid, for instance, it is within the person’s will to be honest or otherwise. Since virtue is acquired, it would not be wrong to hold someone accountable for some of the consequences that emanate from being dishonest. It is possible to argue that virtue ethics is the most promising consideration when compared to deontology and consequentialism since it is holistic and more realistic. Virtue ethics takes account of a person’s emotions, wisdom, character traits, and motivation among other considerations, thereby acknowledging emotions and reason as moral deliberations (Hursthouse 35). On the other hand, deontology and consequentialism exhibit favors to ‘unreliable ‘emotions and they follow a monist orientation towards values, the first value being pleasure or happiness for the consequentialist approach and deference for the moral law in the deontologist approach. There are times that a moral dilemma might have no answers, beyond the fact that it might be murky. Consequentialism and deontology are deliberations that argue on the fact that moral dilemmas are non-existent, thereby indicating that right answers are always there. With the determination that virtues are traits of given agents or interior dispositions, they are applicable to various situations. Conversely, rules are applicable to an individual externally. Even though it would be possible to internalize rules, the possession of inner virtue is far richer since it is part of an individual’s character and might be difficult to disregard. Another consideration in the determination of what is honest or otherwise is the performance of duties. It is evident to argue that when a given factor is intrinsically good, it is the duty of an individual to bring it out to existence. Some of the main intrinsically good things include pleasure, knowledge and virtue. With these considerations, it would be possible to determine that the development of honest mannerisms might be pleasurable, which means that it is the duty of an individual to be honest since it is equally good whether realized in the individual self or in another party. This consideration might be regarded as a general obligation of an individual for upholding necessary virtues. Work Cited Hursthouse Rosalind. On Virtue Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. Print. Temkin, Larry S. Rethinking the Good: Moral Ideals and the Nature of Practical Reasoning. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Print. Read More