That Virtue Ethics Is the Best Balance of Judgment

Aristotle was deemed the most influential philosopher in history, with his book on ethics being in the top of his works. Many philosophers in the years following followed the basic outlines of Aristotle’s teachings. In this paper, I will defend my personal view of the ethical system of virtue ethics. I will explain why I feel virtue ethics is the best balance of judgment. Though it has flaws and varies by situation, it is overall the best theory to live by.

People strive to achieve happiness and most reach it through everyday decision making for what is best for themselves and without harming others.

When I hear the word morality, I understand it as a state of being that you hold yourself to even when no one else is around to hold you accountable for your actions. When I think of a good person, I think of a person who does the best they can with what they have. It’s aiming to do things to only make a positive impact on the world, without taking away from yourself.

In the case of giving to charity, it’s considered a virtuous thing to do but only when you can afford to do so. The theory of harming states that an action harms you only when it makes you worse off then you would have been had that action not been performed. It would be considered ridiculous to give away your last dollar if you needed it because then you are just putting yourself in the same situation.

Get quality help now

Writer Lyla

Verified

Proficient in: Virtue Ethics

5 (876)

“ Have been using her for a while and please believe when I tell you, she never fail. Thanks Writer Lyla you are indeed awesome ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

In virtue ethics, virtue and vice are considered primary. Intellectual virtues in addition to an individuals virtue of character would lead to eudaimonia, or happiness, in the translation of Aristotle. If it conflicts with virtues and is not something a virtuous person would do, then it should be considered wrong to do. Our ethics are often automatic, almost a feeling of common sense to us. A person develops this partly as a result of his or her upbringing, and partly as a result of their habit of action, meaning the environment has a big impact on a persons life experience. Though no one can tell the future outcomes of your actions, an educational guess can be made in a combination of past experiences and your education on the subject.

Aristotle claims you must be studious and well educated to acquire good virtues. You will eventually build your own idea of right from wrong and be able to base your judgment on all factors. It would make sense that lawyers, judges, and members of the supereme court all hold high degrees, often in Ivy league schools. However, Aristotle did not consider ethics just a theoretical or philosophical topic, to understand ethics you have to observe how people interact within society. Social psychology examines how we think about, influence and act in certain situations, focusing on the power of the situation. People who lack virtue should be considered less fortunate, but not shamed. I don’t think you necessarily always need a formal education, but practicing being honest, brave, just, generous, and so on, a person develops an honorable and moral character. I think we can all agree that no human is perfect and we all deserve chances and the benefit of being innocent until proven guilty. The judicial system is the ultimate judge of actions within society.

This moral theory is superior to others because it remains vague and non-demanding. Each and every situation is different from the former, meaning it takes both experience and education on the subject to determine blame or praise. The purpose of praising children is to show what they are doing is good, and encourage future behavior. The same theory holds for adults. It gives us a guide for living without specific rules for solving ethical dilemmas. This opposes the system of utilitarianism, which means to be obligated to do what is for the greatest good, for the greatest number of people. Utilitarianism maximizes the most of everything but too much of anything is never good. Normative moral relativism puts up the argument for utilitarianism that we should respect each societies differing moral views. I disagree with this because I believe everything depends on the circumstances. There is extremism in the world, that I agree our military and government should have some intervention in however I also believe everyone has a right to their own opinion of societal morals. I believe in a middle ground which virtue ethics provides.

It’s rare that people are naturally evil. People are slowly persuaded into attitude changes which results in extreme action. In fact, we experience discomfort when our actions are not consistent with our ordinary beliefs. This is cognitive dissonance, an internal conflict that can be resolved by weighing the reasoning of the situation. In the system of utilitarianism, there would be no reasoning and if someone was to do something bad, they would be perceived as a bad person despite specific circumstances.

In the eyes of Aristotle friendship is believed to be the most important parts of life. This speaks to me because I believe who you surround yourself with is who you become. To find people that impact your life for the better with mutual love and respect will make for a happy life. There are different levels of friendships, from social, to business, and