EVALUATIVE PAPER:
COURSE
OUTCOMES
Reference
LEARNING ● To understand and evaluate the basic Concepts
of Ethics
Wolff, Jonathan. An Introduction to Moral
Philosophy, 219-229.
Read and Understand the 13th Chapter of Wolff’s Introduction to
Moral Philosophy.
Guidelines
for
the
evaluative
essay:
1. There is no upper limit on the number of pages, but the lower limit is at least two (2)
pages. Single-spaced format, size 12 font (any legible font), 1-inch margin on all sides
of
the
document.
2. Please focus on these two guide questions: a) what are the points in Chapter 13
of Wolff’s work and b) what are the stakes involved in the discussion. Reflections
and
further
analysis
are
very
welcome
in
this
exercise.
3. Please submit your essays to me via Google Classroom (in .doc or .docx format).
The Chapter 13 of the Introduction to Moral Philosophy by Jonathan Wolff
identifies the problems and challenges that virtue ethics come against with relation to
the point of views of various philosophers and ideologists. The chapter also reviewed
some critique of the position of Aristotle on virtue ethics.
The first argument notes that Aristotle's concept of morality is fairly broad and
frequently concerned with how much people enjoy their own lives and with external
variables like affluence, good looks, and wit. Chapter 13 addresses a number of
issues. The virtue ethics of Aristotle have drawn criticism for being inimical to morals
and common good. Some contend he has incorporated elements unrelated to ethics.
Another criticism of Aristotle's virtue ethics is that he said that having money,
family, and other external influences are all parts of living a good life, which includes
living morally uprightly. This argument leads to a conflict with other philosophers over
whether acquiring a good life depends primarily on chance or on external conditions.
It emphasizes how difficult it will be for those who have horrible luck to uphold the
greatest moral standards. The Christian tradition also gave rise to the Stoic emphasis
on interior states as a result of this issue, which is best shown by Immanuel Kant's
belief that only "good will" has moral value. The philosophy of Aristotle contrasts
sharply with that of the Stoics, Christians, and Kantians.
The core of this second issue is the disagreement over whether the possibility
of leading a morally honest life should be so dependent on chance, or, to put it another
way, on outside circumstances. This is relevant to the tale in the Bible about the rich
man and the poor widow. This states that if you agree that a widow's gift is more
honorable than a rich person's, you are backing Christians and Stoics. If not, you
concur with Aristotle. My gut instinct supports the Stoics, Christians, and Kantians in
this situation.
In my own viewpoint on this matter, the essence of giving should depend on the
intent of giving rather than a person's social or financial level. There are wealthy people
who give generously, and there are impoverished people who donate but do it with
resentment or malice.
There is a third objection as well, but it contrasts Immanuel Kant's view of the
moral conundrum. It was mentioned in this section that the majority of Aristotelian
readers find his virtue ethics frustrating to read since it does not provide or point to a
clear direction to assist them in resolving their moral dilemmas. Aristotle simply
described or stated what a good person would do in such difficult circumstances, but
in the real world, you will struggle to put those ethics into practice and be at a loss for
what to do.
Aristotle's ethics, in my opinion, are not particularly flawed because you can
find some ethics-related inspiration in his writings. However, you are ultimately
responsible for choosing what acts to do, how to take them, and who is responsible
for the results of those actions. As a result, virtue theory and abortion were another
topic covered in Chapter 13.
Rosalind Hursthouse said, "In exercising a moral right, I can do something
cruel, or callous, or selfish, or light-minded, self-righteous, stupid, inconsiderate,
disloyal, dishonest—that is, act viciously." Based on Hursthouse's statement, it is clear
that abortion is typically framed in terms of two main concerns: first, whether a fetus
has the status of a person; and second, whether a It has some relationship to the prochoice/body campaign, which is currently a hot topic in the Philippines surrounding the
legality of abortion. However, abortion has many flaws when it comes to discussions
of moral behavior, since some claim that even though the pregnancy was unintentional
or resulted from events like rape or an unwanted pregnancy, it was still morally wrong.
Given that it is against religious teaching to abort a child, doing so is unethical. Another
unexpected virtue ethics has been covered in this chapter in addition to virtue theory
and abortion. Based on a social psychology experiment, it discusses our traits and
personalities and how relatively unimportant "situational" characteristics like mood
more accurately predict our behavior than our personalities do.
If I were to assess the abortion situation, I would be pro-choice because we
shouldn't carry a child for the sake of life; instead, we should consider the future life of
the child. Will that baby grow up with love or with hostility from those who are meant
to be his or her parents? They say we should always choose life because children are
blessings, but we also need to remember that while they may be blessings to us, their
parents or other caregivers should also be blessings to them.
The fourth argument is supported by social psychology experiments. We could
conclude that the virtue ethics method emphasizes a person's moral character. Its
objective is to instill virtue in people so they learn to cherish it. This tactic is supported
by the seemingly harmless concept that every individual has a unique personality that
greatly affects their behavior. Imagine, however, that this is untrue and that, rather
than being influenced by our own personalities, our behavior is instead determined by
outside causes. If this is the case, social psychology research may indicate that
Aristotle's theory is false since our acts no longer accurately reflect our separate
personalities. Moral behavior comes easily.
The fifth issue, which touches on the crucial and delicate subjects of race and
gender, is the final but certainly not the least. Discussion of Plato and Aristotle's
philosophical perspectives on women's equality with men led to Aristotle's disturbing
opinions on women and slavery. Aristotle's viewpoint states that if you are a woman—
or, we should add, a non-Greek—you cannot live the highest form of a happy
existence. Prior to that, we can detect a somewhat elitist aspect in his perspective. On
the other hand, Aristotle's own teacher, Plato, had a different take on this matter and
had a different attitude on women. In the ideal Republic, women should be educated
and permitted to work side by side with men without distinction, according to Plato,
who was open to the possibility of gender equality. He stated that women were not
equal to men in terms of strength and virtue but were. Although he claims in the
Republic that women have the same potential for ruling as men, Plato appears to be
an early feminist.
Overall, one can therefore draw the conclusion that Jonathan Wolff wrote this
chapter on virtue ethics' difficulties in order to examine some of the strongest
objections to virtue ethics with regard to the various positions taken by some notable
philosophers, including Aristotle, Plato, Immanuel Kant, and even Rosalind
Hursthouse. This chapter helped me to understand virtue ethics better and to gain a
deeper understanding of it.