Lecture 8 Objectives: After learning this material you will be able to:
1. Present the basic arguments concerning virtue ethics.
2. Understand the Doctrine of the Mean in Aristotle and Confucius.
3. Discuss the nature of the relationship between feeling and virtue.
4. Understand the issues concerned with feminist care ethics.
5. Reflect on the principles of moral integrity and the unity of virtue.
6. Compare and contrast the relationship of virtue to different ideas concerning
moral education.
Welcome back! The last lecture continued to explore some of the ideas that imply
that morality and ethics are based on universal principles. Specifically we studied
deontology (the ethics of duty) and rights ethics to help us understand how these
theories influence our understanding of what is good. In this lecture we will
present a final ethical theory called virtue ethics. The emphasis here is on
becoming a good person rather than on following specific moral guidelines. How
we become virtuous depends partially on how you answer the question of
whether we are born good, evil or neutral. In the process we will seek to
understand whether virtue itself is relative or universal.
Virtue Ethics and Character
There are people who do good things without being able to give a so-called
“reason” for doing so. They may never have studied ethics and might not know
the difference between duty ethics and utilitarianism. Yet they do good and
desire to do good. This is because goodness springs from who they are rather
than what they believe or think. “Virtue ethics emphasizes right being over right
action. The sort of person we are constitutes the heart of our moral life. More
important than the rules or principles we follow is our character. A person of
virtuous character can be depended upon to do the right thing. Virtue ethics,
however, is not an alternative to ethical theories that stress right conduct, such
as utilitarianism and deontological theories. Rather, virtue ethics and theories of
right action complement each other” (Judith A. Boss, Ethics For Life: A Text With
Readings, Fourth Edition, [New York, New York: McGraw Hill, 2008] p. 400.
Hereafter referred to as Boss.) Some people think that all of the effort we put into
trying to figure out what is right is a waste of time.
If we would focus our energy on simply becoming a person of virtuous character
then we would not need to worry about what is best; we would simply act in the
best way possible for all concerned. In reality it might not be all that simple.
People of good character do not always agree on what is best and sometimes
must struggle with uncertainty, but it is still an important part of the equation. If
we both develop our character and learn the rules we have covered so far in this
course then we have a much better chance of living authentic lives of goodness
and being able to live without regrets.
What is a Virtue?
1
We hear a lot during political campaigns about the “character issue.” We want
our leaders to be people of character and by that we usually mean virtuous
people. But what is virtue? “A moral virtue is an admirable character trait or
disposition to habitually act in a manner that benefits oneself and others. We
often speak of virtue in terms of individual traits, yet virtue is more correctly
defined as an overarching quality of goodness or excellence that gives unity and
integrity to a person’s character. A vice, in contrast, is a character trait or
disposition to act in a manner that harms oneself and others. Vices stand in our
way of achieving happiness and the good life” (Boss, p. 401.) Rather than a static
quality, a virtue such as courage is a dynamic quality because it is always
changing and adapting itself to situations. It is also important to see how the
virtues are not an abstract idea, but a helpful quality that makes our lives better.
The virtues help us live in a way that brings happiness and honor rather than
sadness and shame.
We misunderstand virtue when we think of it as only about goodness and
character rather than about joy and fulfillment. “Virtue ethics is based upon
certain assumptions about human nature. Most virtue ethicists believe that virtue
is important for achieving not only moral well-being but also happiness and inner
harmony. Aristotle referred to this sense of psychological well-being as
eudaemonia. Eudaemonia is not the same as what utilitarians or egoists mean by
happiness. Rather, it is a condition of the soul or psyche; it is the good that
humans seek by nature and that arises from the fulfillment of our function as
humans. Eudaemonia is similar to Eastern and modern Western concepts such
as enlightenment, nirvana, self-actualization, and proper self-esteem” (Boss, p.
401.) The Buddha taught people how to end their suffering. There are many
aspects to this, but one important component to his solution (known as the Noble
Eightfold Path) is to live in such a way that we do not create more misery for
ourselves and other people. This is only possible when we live in an ethical
manner, one that is fostered by living a life of virtue.
The Role of Intention
During this course we have discussed the outcome of our actions (utilitarianism)
and doing our duty (deontology), but you may have noticed that we have not
spent much time discussing what role our intentions play. This is the realm of
virtue ethics. “An action may be morally good because it has a certain quality,
such as being beneficial; however, this in itself does not make it a virtuous act.
For example, a wealthy person may give a million dollars to a charity simply
because she wants the tax deduction or a building named after her. Although the
act itself is good in terms of its consequences, we would probably hesitate to say
that she is virtuous for doing it. The actions of a virtuous person stem from an
underlying disposition of concern for the well-being of others and themselves, or
what Aristotle called ‘a certain frame of mind.’ A poor widow may give her last
coin to the needy out of compassion. Although the consequences of her action
2
are not nearly as far-reaching as those of the wealthy patroness, most people
would agree that the widow is the more virtuous of the two” (Boss, p. 404.) This
is a good example of how a virtuous person is something much deeper than
simply the sum total of their actions.
This is because a virtuous person includes qualities such as motivation. A person
who does good only to be noticed or to get something in return is missing an
important part of what it means to be a good person, a person of character. In the
same way, a person of character can do something wrong or make a mistake
and we feel differently about this from a person who does not mean well and
makes the same error. On one level an error is an error; what difference does it
make? Yet we realize it makes all the difference in the world.
Sometimes people avoid confrontations by not taking a stand on an issue. Often
this does not matter and may even be wise! But other times not taking a stand is
actually making an important choice in terms of ethics. If you see someone being
hurt and you do not do anything to stop it, what does that say about your
character? “Simply refraining from harming others is not enough to make us
morally good people. It is also necessary to cultivate a good will. Performing
morally good actions strengthens a virtuous disposition. Action and practice are
the means by which our natural predisposition and energies are developed into
virtues. According to Mill, reflection, which includes moral analysis, provides the
bridge that connects action and the cultivation of a virtuous disposition. Our
actions test our old habits and call upon us to reflect on our past actions and to
reevaluate ourselves and our alternatives. Reflection, which is grounded in moral
values, in turn generates a habitual virtuous moral response” (Boss, p. 405.) This
is one of the reasons why Socrates taught that the unexamined life was not worth
living.
Self-Knowledge
Socrates knew that people who avoided learning about themselves would only
end up unhappy. Now we know from modern psychology why he was right. The
unconscious has a huge influence on our motivations and behavior and if we
want to live lives of goodness and character then we need to become more
conscious. For example, if we don’t face our anger we may avoid hitting
someone if we are strong on self-discipline, but we only push the anger down
into the unconscious where it remains a volatile energy. Eventually it reemerges
as passive-aggressive behavior that even we ourselves do not understand
unless we are able to learn to work with this repressed energy. A person of
character works to become more conscious.
This work on consciousness is also a work of developing virtue because it forms
what psychologists call a positive feedback loop. The more conscious we
become the less we hurt others. The less we hurt others the less shame we feel
and thus we are more willing to explore our depths (rather than hide) and
3
uncover our unconscious motivations. This is why the Buddha taught his
disciples to both meditate and live an ethical life. Meditation would help them
ethically and living ethically would help their meditation. We see a similar
understanding of what today we would call psychology in Greek philosophy.
“According to Aristotle, immorality results from a disordered psyche. Virtue
serves as a correction to our passions by helping us resist our impulses and
passions that interfere with us living the life of reason: the good life. For example,
the virtue of courage is a corrective to the emotion of fear. Temperance is a
corrective to the temptation to overindulge or to seek immediate pleasure.
Aristotle, however, did not want to see passion eliminated; he recognized that
emotion is an important component of moral goodness. Although our emotions
and passions should always be subject to the control of reason, this is not the
same as saying that emotions are bad and should be eliminated. Rather, he was
saying that emotions such as fear or boldness and anger or pity are appropriate
at times, but only when they are under the control of reason” (Boss, pp. 408409.)
Our passions are also what enable us to will the good according to philosophers
such as David Hume and feminist care ethics. It is one thing to know the good
and another thing to do what is right. One of the main sources of motivation we
have is our feeling, which needs to be engaged rather than suppressed.
Unfortunately, for various historical reasons, the life of virtue became associated
with a life of denying the feelings.
The wisdom of coming to know ourselves and of bringing our feelings into our
lives (guided by reason of course) is found in both the East as well as the West.
“There are strong strands of virtue ethics in both Buddhist and Hindu ethics. Both
stress the importance of reason and wisdom in the virtuous life. Buddhist virtue
ethics is also teleological in that it is directed toward the end of self-realization or
Nirvana or the extinction of suffering. According to Buddha, the normal human
condition is accompanied by suffering. In addition to ignorance and irrationality,
two major causes of suffering are the moral vices of greed and hatred. To
overcome suffering, we need to cultivate wisdom as well as the virtues of giving
and love” (Boss, p. 409.)
For the Greeks, especially Aristotle, the greatest virtue was wisdom because
without this virtue we would not be able to put the others to their best use.
Religious people sometimes place faith and/or love above wisdom, but it will
nevertheless be high on their lists as well. The goal of a virtuous life is to live with
both an open heart and an open mind. Love and wisdom are the keys to
understanding virtuous people.
Aristotle and Confucius: The Doctrine of the Mean
You have probably heard of the virtue of moderation. A famous proverb says: “All
things in moderation.” The Buddha taught the “middle way” between the
4
extremes of asceticism and self-indulgence. It is no surprise then that virtue
ethics also looks to a middle way of its own. “The Doctrine of the Mean is found
in both Eastern and Western philosophies. According to the Doctrine of the
Mean, most virtues entail finding the mean between excess and deficiency.
Some character traits or dispositions, however, are good or evil in themselves.
For example, both Confucius and Aristotle believed that ignorance and malice
are always vices, and wisdom is always a virtue. In Buddhist ethics, the virtue of
ahimsa, or nonharming, which is reflected in a person’s respect for all living
beings, is good in itself. For Confucians, ‘absolute sincerity’ is always a virtue
and is considered the highest virtue that we can cultivate. ‘Only those who are
absolutely sincere,’ Confucius wrote, ‘can fully develop their nature’” (Boss, pp.
411-412.) In other words, moderation in most things is important but that does
not mean you have to be moderate in the amount of wisdom and love you have
or that you can be moderately cruel. We have to be careful to not take the idea of
moderation out of its context.
Part of this context is to not use the idea of moderation to justify a lack of
involvement in important issues. “The doctrine of the mean should not be
misinterpreted as advising us to be wishy-washy or to compromise our moral
standards. Aristotle and Confucius were not suggesting that we seek a
consensus or take a moderate position. The doctrine of the mean is meant to
apply to virtues, not to our positions on moral issues. Aristotle was not referring
to being lukewarm or a fence-straddler but to seeking what is reasonable” (Boss,
p. 412.) Aristotle taught people to analyze extremes such as cowardice and
foolhardiness to find the mean, which is the virtue (in this case courage.) It is too
easy for young men to do foolhardy things and call it courage, but courage as a
virtue will not contradict another virtue such as being able to use our heads.
Courage does not require us to be stupid!
Finding virtue, however, is not as easy as looking something up in a chart. This
is, once again, because of its dynamic nature. “How do we know when we have
found the mean? The mean in this context is also not the same as the
mathematical mean. There are no formulas or rules for deciding what is virtuous
for a particular person in a particular situation. Aristotle offers the following
practical advice: ‘(1) Keep away from that extreme which is more opposed to the
mean…(2) Note the errors into which we personally are most liable to fall…(3)
Always be particularly on your guard against pleasure and pleasant things.’ By
living according to the doctrine of the mean, Aristotle and Confucius both
believed, we can find the greatest happiness and inner harmony. To do this, it is
important to be aware of the tendencies of your personality so that, if necessary,
you can habituate yourself to compensate for them. This involves noticing how
you respond to others and listening to your conscience” (Boss, p. 414.) In other
words, to live a life of virtue we have to live a life of mindfulness. To live mindfully
we must work to increase our awareness and consciousness so that we do not
slip into evasions and rationalizations and all of the other fallacies we studied
earlier in this course.
5
David Hume: Sentiment and Virtue
While Aristotle thought wisdom was the most important virtue and reason its
greatest tool, not everyone agrees with him. “Most Western philosophers
emphasize reason over sentiment; others, such as David Hume (1711-1776) and
Nel Noddings (b. 1929), believe that sympathy and caring are the most important
virtues. According to these philosophers, moral sentiments like compassion and
sympathy are forms of knowledge regarding moral standards that should be
taken seriously. Sympathy forms the heart of our conscience and complements
rather than competes with the more cognitive virtues. Sympathy involves both
feeling pleased by another’s accomplishments and feeling indignation at
another’s injury or misfortune. Sympathy joins us to others, breaking down
barriers. In Confucian ethics, caring and loyalty in the context of the traditional
family are extremely important. It is absurd, Mencius argued, to claim that one
ought to save a stranger rather than one’s child; our special obligations to those
we have a relationship with goes beyond our abstract obligations to one another
as humans” (Boss, p. 415.) We can verify this idea in what we give our time and
money to when it comes to good causes.
For example, there are a multitude of wonderful charities. So why do we give to
one and not another? It is not a purely rational decision because on rational
grounds any honorable charity can be supported. The difference seems to be in
our feelings. We are moved not simply by an idea, but by a feeling. This is why
feelings can be considered as a form of knowledge, a way of knowing.
Hume made this same point because it seemed to him that many great
philosophers had missed this point. “Unlike Kant and Aristotle, Hume argued that
reason or reflection can only tell us what is right or wrong. Reason, however,
cannot move us to act virtuously. Instead, it is sentiment that actually moves us
to act virtuously. According to Hume, sympathy is the greatest virtue, and cruelty,
or the lack of sympathy, is the greatest vice. His claim is not without empirical
support. In a study of people who rescued Jews during World War II, most
rescuers reported that they rarely engaged in reflection before acting. They
reported that they acted instead from a sense of care and sympathy” (Boss, p.
416.) We often don’t even have time to reflect on what we “should” do; instead
we do what comes naturally to us. This is why the formation of our character is
so important.
One of the things developmental psychologists look for in people as they mature
is a growing circle of care and sympathy. Someone who only thinks of himself or
herself is fine as a baby, but as an adult it is very sad because they are virtually
disabled. The virtues help us expand our understanding of who and what is
included in our moral circle. “Sympathy opens us up to others by breaking down
the us/them mentality that acts as a barrier to expanding our moral community.
Sympathy involves being in relationship in a way that reason does not. The
6
sympathetic person sees service as a mutual process where all parties are
engaged. Sympathy as a virtue entails listening to the people we are serving
rather than defining their problems ourselves and imposing our ready-made
solutions. Sympathy opens up our hearts to bear the stories of those we are
serving. By allowing them also to serve us, we can learn from their experiences
and their strengths” (Boss, p. 417.) This is one of the great values of doing
community service work. We do it to be of service, but in the process we usually
gain so much more because our hearts expand and we grow more kind.
It is all too easy for ethical theories to simply become divorced from life and loss
in the realm of abstractions. “Justice and reason demand that everyone be
treated equally, but caring requires also that our moral decisions be made in the
context of relationships” (Boss, p. 418.) Theories do not mean a whole lot until
we face real suffering and misery and then seek to solve the problems we face.
Then ethics becomes practical as we seek the good in the concrete world of real
life and real people. It is so easy to say the poor should take care of themselves
from the place of theory. But when one is confronted with real poverty then one
aches to help alleviate such deprivation.
Feminist Approaches to Ethics
The voice of women has been absent for too long due to the patriarchal culture
that informed so much of our world’s values until recently. But this is changing
and women philosophers are beginning to be heard not only in academia, but
also in politics where ethics comes alive and gets applied (or ignored) on a large
scale. “Western ethical theory has been faulted by feminists as showing little
concern for women’s rights and interests, and for valuing traditional masculine
traits and virtues such as reason, independence, individual achievement, and
autonomy over traditional feminine virtues such as sympathy, interdependence,
community, and peace. Most modern feminist ethicists, such as Carol Gilligan,
believe that these gender differences are a combination of nature and nurture. In
addition, feminist ethicists maintain that the issues that arise in the ‘private world’
of home and family have been too often dismissed by traditional ethicists as
boring and morally uninteresting” (Boss, p. 419.) What would it be like to have a
gender-equal ethics? It would mean a new understanding of balance, where
men’s and women’s values combined in new ways to create a new ethics. It will
be exciting to see where it all goes.
One of the main complaints of feminist care ethicists is that traditional masculine
ethics are too abstract. “While care ethicists do not reject the use of principles
altogether, they believe that it is care, not rational calculations or an abstract
sense of duty, that creates moral obligation. In other words, practical morality is
constructed through interaction with others, not merely by an autonomous
examination of the dictates of reason” (Boss, p. 419.) We learn more from acting
ethically and practicing virtue than from reading about it. We might understand
the importance of kindness intellectually, but then one day when we are down
7
someone really does something kind for us and it “blows us away.” We will
always have a new understanding of what it means to be kind because it has
become real to us.
We can see how this new level of kindness comes into play when it comes to
how we treat animals. There are all sorts of arguments out there that inform of us
on different sides of whether or not we should eat animals, experiment on them
and other such ethical subjects. But what touches our feelings? “Ecofeminist
Karen Warren expands care ethics to include all living creatures and all of nature.
Care, according to her, is unlimited by the ability of the recipient to reciprocate.
She argues that the virtue of sympathy of care joins us to others and breaks
down barriers, not just between humans, but between humans and the rest of the
natural world. Like many of the early feminists, she maintains that one of the
goals of feminism is the liberation of nature as well as women by erasing
oppressive categories based on superiority and privilege, and ‘the creation of a
world in which difference does not breed domination.’ To do this, Warren argues,
we need to cultivate what philosopher Marilyn Frye refers to as the ‘loving eye’ of
care ethics rather than the ‘arrogant eye’ of an ethics based on domination and
conquests” (Boss, p. 424.) Usually the best way to change someone into a
vegetarian (or at least a more conscious consumer of organic meats) is not to
argue with him or her but to show him or her the way most animals are treated in
the process of becoming items on the table. Then something besides the intellect
is engaged, feelings are touched, and behavior changes. It is a very interesting
process!
Is Virtue Culturally Relative?
We have been studying virtue and now it is time to address the issue of
relativism once again. Are virtues constant and universal? “Although different
cultures and groups of people may emphasize different virtues (sociological
relativism), this does not mean that virtue is culturally relative in the sense that
the concept of virtue is a cultural creation. Indeed, what is most striking are the
similarities among the various lists of virtues rather than the differences. For
example, anthropologist Clyde Kluckholn noted that, among the Navaho, the
primary virtues are generosity, loyalty, self-control, peacefulness, amity,
courteousness, and honesty. These virtues are not seen as peculiar to Navaho
but are regarded by them as desirable for all humans and as universal as the air
we breathe” (Boss, p. 428.)
Let’s look at another culture. “The Egyptian text The Instruction of Ptahhotep,
written more than four thousand years ago, states that the following virtues
should be practiced toward everyone: self-control, moderation, kindness,
generosity, justice, and truthfulness, and discretion. The Swahili proverbs teach
that a virtuous person is kind, cautious (prudent), patient, courageous, selfcontrolled, humble (in the Kantian sense), honest, fair, responsible, respectful,
and cooperative. Thus, although the relative importance of different virtues may
8
vary from culture to culture, the list of what are considered virtues and what are
considered vices seems to be transcultural” (Boss, p. 428.) Just as we can say
all people need to eat food but different people eat different kinds of food, so all
people need the virtues even though how the virtues are rated differ from one
culture and time to another. For example, I mentioned earlier how the Greeks
valued wisdom above all of the virtues, while Christians value love as the
greatest virtue. Nevertheless, both the Greeks and Christians value love and
wisdom, only the emphasis placed on each differs.
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) questioned the virtues of traditional Christianity,
but he did not question virtue itself. In fact he proposed his own greatest virtue,
known as the will to power, which has been greatly misunderstood and abused.
“By the will to power, Nietzsche meant ‘the will to grow, spread, seize, become
predominant’ that is found in all living beings. The will to power involves the
experience of living at its greatest. In his book, The Dawn, Nietzsche lists ‘The
good four. Honest with ourselves and whatever is friend to us; courageous
toward the enemy; generous toward the vanquished; polite - always; that is how
the four cardinal virtues want us.’ Weak people, in contrast, make humility, selfsacrifice, and equality into virtues because they lack the courage, power, and
personal resolve to live the life of the great person. Thus, the Christian ‘herd
morality’ drags the best and strongest people down to the lowest common
denominator” (Boss, p. 430.)
Nietzsche questioned values such as humility and forgiveness if they were used
to allow people to continue to abuse us or for people to put up with evil
governments. Karl Marx complained that religion was the opiate of the people for
the same reason. While there are other ways to understand these religious
virtues of course, the fact is that Nietzsche and Marx were dealing with the facts
around them, not with the theory of what these virtues could mean.
Nietzsche taught that some characteristics that were called virtues were actually
ruining society. “Like junk food that is bad for our bodies, virtues that impede our
growth as humans are junk virtues. A culture that promotes junk virtues as true
virtues is destructive to the development of moral character” (Boss, p. 430.) One
example of a modern American “virtue” is the push to be busy and efficient.
While there is nothing wrong with these traits in themselves we can also see how
they can lead to the feeling that there is never enough time and we are always
rushing around trying to take care of millions of things. Many Americans have lost
a sense of the values of silence and contemplation. Our growing level of anxiety
and depression may very well speak to this issue as well.
One of the things that most philosophers, East and West, ancient and modern,
seem to agree upon is that virtue is not a simple given, but that it must be
cultivated. “A virtuous character does not develop in isolation but in community.
As Aristotle pointed out, we do not become more virtuous by merely reflecting on
or intellectualizing virtues but by living a virtuous life. A good society provides an
9
environment where virtues are encouraged and where people can thrive and
develop to their fullest potential” (Boss, p. 431.) An interesting task is to analyze
different cultures according to how well they advocate and support the virtuous
life. Take a look at modern popular culture in the United States and ask yourself
what it leads to and what it celebrates. It is not always a pretty picture! This is
why we are very fortunate if we have virtuous people in our lives. Their presence
in our lives is the best guide to whether or not we can live virtuous lives
ourselves.
Moral Integrity and the Unity of Virtue
If we are not careful it is easy to talk about the virtuous life as if it is only a
collection of separated characteristics that you either possess or do not. But it is
more than that. When we look closely at what is going on we see that the sum is
greater than its parts. “According to Aristotle, virtue is a unifying concept rather
than simply a collection of different personality traits. We speak of a good person
as being virtuous in a general sense. Virtue, in other words, is the disposition that
predisposes us to act in a manner that benefits ourselves and others” (Boss, p.
432.) That is why we see virtuous people as loving and wise and kind… Different
characteristics may manifest under different conditions and requirements, but
what we really intuit is a general sense of goodness. This is what makes virtuous
people so attractive.
To a certain extent humans are a contradictory species! We are both lazy and
ambitious, loving and spiteful, forgiving and judgmental. But one of the things we
find attractive about virtuous people is how their character seems to come
together into a seamless whole. “The concept of virtue as a unifying principle in
the human psyche, rather than a collection of discrete personality traits, is found
in both Eastern and Western virtue ethics. Nietzsche regarded the will to power
as the fount of all virtuous action. In Chinese philosophy, hsin - that which is one
with nature and the principle of all conscious and moral activity - is the source of
all virtue. Virtue, according to Confucian ethics, stems from an all-pervading
unity” (Boss, p. 432.) Once again we have a positive feedback loop where the
virtues lead to unity and unity supports being able to live a virtuous life and be a
fulfilled person.
Unity within our nature leads to greater contentment and less suffering. We don’t
experience as much tension and fear because we can relax more into the
present moment. “The good life entails cultivating all the virtues, it involves living
a life of integrity. Without integrity, we are not truly virtuous because there is still
disharmony within ourselves” (Boss, p. 433.) One of the ironies of life is that
when we feel restless and discontent we look for something in the outer world to
bring us peace or at least distraction. But the real answer, we are told by so
many sages, is to find peace within. One way to do find this inner peace is to
become a unified person, a virtuous human being.
10
But lest we become discouraged early on we must begin the journey with an
emphasis on each step rather than on our future destination. “The cultivation of
virtue and the good will is a lifelong process. Very few people ever attain a level
of moral development where they no longer struggle against temptation.
According to Aristotle, for those who constantly strive to be virtuous, being a
virtuous person gradually becomes much easier and more pleasurable. To
determine whether we are virtuous people, Aristotle suggests that all we must do
is ask ourselves whether we find pleasure in acting virtuously” (Boss, p. 434.)
When it seems difficult to do the right thing we know we still have to mature and
grow up into more loving people. When we find it actually brings us both peace
and energy to do what is right then we know we have started down the right path.
Sages often give up many things valued by popular culture such as wealth and
loose living. But they say popular culture has really given up the most because
people who live according to the standards of a materialistic culture have given
up in so many cases peace, joy, and fulfillment. Which people, they challenge us,
have given up the most?
Virtue and Moral Education
We have discussed the need to cultivate the virtues, but we have not yet brought
in an underlying problem. It seems that how we go about cultivating a virtuous life
depends to a certain extent on how we see ourselves in the first place. Are we
naturally bad? Good? Neutral? “Lao Tzu regarded people as basically good. The
Tao, he maintained, not only shapes our character but provides us with ethical
principles. We have only to lose ourselves in the Tao just as a fish loses itself in
water. Cultivating virtue involves letting go and letting the guiding principles flow
naturally out of the Tao. However, Lao Tzu did not advocate apathy and shutting
ourselves off from the world. Moral education instead involves being open to
others and affirming their natural goodness” (Boss, p. 435.) Thomas Aquinas, a
medieval theologian, thought that people were born with a sinful nature, but
through a combination of grace and grit people could lead the virtuous life.
Because people naturally leaned toward what was wrong, they had to undergo a
deep inner transformation and then combine this with a vigorous discipline to
educate their character.
The Greeks seemed to come down somewhere in the middle between
Christianity and Taoism. “For Aristotle, it is not enough to simply nurture our
natural inclinations. The cultivation of virtues requires willpower and practice as
well. We acquire virtue primarily through repetition or habituation. Because
humans are social as well as rational beings, becoming virtuous involves both
the cultivation of reason and proper socialization. We do not become just simply
by believing in the principle of justice. We become just or unjust in the course of
our dealings with others. It is our duty, therefore, to practice the various virtues
so that we will become proficient” (Boss, p. 435.) While Aristotle placed a great
deal of emphasis on our actions, the Buddha would place even greater emphasis
on our thoughts. He taught that we needed to change our thinking, and once we
11
did that we would see our actions begin to fall into place more naturally and
gracefully. This is one of the reasons why Buddhism has so much emphasis on
meditation and on learning to see the world correctly according their philosophy.
When we see things through eyes that have not been trained, we see a
superficial world, which then leads to a superficial life.
Critique of Virtue Ethics
The biggest problem with virtue ethics is the same problem we have seen with
each of the rules we have studied in past lectures. It is great as a piece of the
puzzle, but it does not work well if it is seen as complete in itself. “The primary
criticism of virtue ethics is that it is incomplete. Virtue ethics has been criticized
for its lack of emphasis on actions” (Boss, p. 437.) Some people feel that if you
just talk about being a good person you forget that good people must do good
things! But usually this is not such a problem. It would seem that it is easier for
“bad” people to do good things for some ulterior reason then for a good person to
avoid doing what is necessary. This is because the nature of goodness seems to
be to give itself away in compassion and service.
Is being a virtuous person enough? Most philosophers do not think so. “Virtue
alone does not offer sufficient guidance for making moral decisions in the real
world. Virtue may be adequate for the saint, but most of us also need formal
moral guidelines” (Boss, pp. 437-438.) If we are a virtuous person we might lean
more naturally to do the good, but that does not always make the good clear,
especially in our increasingly complex world. Most good people still struggle with
the great moral questions. This is why even virtuous people benefit from
understanding moral theory and studying moral rules as we have been doing in
this class.
It used to be that the only real care the poor and sick received came from
charitable organizations, both religious and secular. But what happens when the
state takes over many of these functions? “Virtue ethics goes beyond pure duty
and rights-based ethics by challenging us to rise above ordinary moral demands.
Philosopher Christina Sommers argues that individuals are transferring too much
responsibility for the well-being of others onto institutions and professionals. She
concludes that these solutions are incomplete and that what is needed instead is
the virtuous individual” (Boss, p. 438.) It is important to send off a check to
different groups doing good works, but virtue ethics tells us that it is necessary
for us to get more actively involved as well because it is only in the practice of
virtue in relationship with other people that we truly become good.
The best thing about virtue ethics is that it challenges us on the level of our
motivations and intentions. This seems to have been the interest of Jesus as
well. When he taught people that not only should people not commit adultery,
they shouldn’t even look upon one another in this way, he was moving morality
inward. It is not enough to just follow the rules. “The development of a virtuous
12
character is essential to the concept of the good life and the good society. While
virtue ethics does not stand on its own as an independent moral theory, nor do
most virtue ethics intend to, virtue ethics offers an important corrective to a
morality based on abstract moral principles and rights” (Boss, p. 439.) When we
bring all of the various rules we have studied together with an emphasis on
becoming a good person, a person of character, we begin to approach the ideal
of being able to apply moral theory in real life.
Reflection: Applying Moral Theory in Real Life
I hope that one of the things you have learned in this class is to question the
value of moral relativism and subjectivity. There is a certain place for sociological
relativism, but it is a fallacy to jump from that to ethical relativism. “As people
mature in their moral reasoning, they look to universal moral principles and
sentiments, rather than relativist theories, for moral guidance. According to
developmental psychologists, people at the higher stages of moral reasoning
tend to make more satisfactory moral decisions and are better at resolving moral
dilemmas” (Boss, p. 441.) Mature people are able to accept and celebrate
differences and diversity without condoning injustice in the name of respect and
tolerance.
Let’s briefly review what we have learned so that we can tie it all together.
“Utilitarianism, one of the first universal moral theories we studied, has proven to
be very useful in evaluating and developing public policy. However, it risks
neglecting personal integrity in seeking the greatest good for the community.
Ethical egoism, on the other hand, focuses too much on the individual to the
neglect of the community and social good” (Boss, p. 441.) Once again, we see
how these two opposite ideas contradict one another when standing alone, but
how both can bring important ideas that should be included in any integral ethical
theory.
If we can’t simply judge the goodness of an act by its consequences then we
might be tempted to judge it only by the nature of the action itself. “Kantian
deontology, while offering a strong foundation for ethics in the form of the
categorical imperative, tends to be too demanding. It also ignores consequences
in making moral decisions. Prima facie deontology provides a corrective to the
rigidity of Kantian deontology and, at the same time, recognizes future-looking
duties. However, neither form of deontology adequately addresses the issue of
moral rights. Rights ethics, on the other hand, without being tied to deontology,
allows the strong to assert their rights at the expense of the weak” (Boss, pp.
441-442.) It is easy to get so caught up in the rules that we ignore the
consequences. This can be a disaster.
When it comes to rights ethics, and we grow up in a democracy we tend to think
that the majority is right. But history gives us example after example of where the
majority has failed to see what is good. Thus there has always been fear of the
13
“tyranny of the majority.” “Finally, virtue ethics points out the importance of a
virtuous character in morality and the importance of seeking the mean. However,
it does not, on its own provide adequate guidelines for making moral decisions in
everyday life, especially ones involving issues of justice” (Boss, p. 442.) An
emphasis on intention and underlying motivations brings balance to the many
ethical theories that focus on the outward actions rather than the inward
development of people and how these traits contribute to the moral life of a
society.
What happens when we bring them all together? “While all the moral theories we
studied have a different focus, there is a great deal of overlap between the
universal moral theories. They all claim that moral principles should be applied
universally and impartially. They all require that we treat persons with respect whether person be defined as all sentient beings or, more narrowly, as only
rational beings. All the universal moral theories promote self-improvement in
virtue and wisdom” (Boss, p. 442.) It is frustrating to see how people can be so
narrow in their outlook that they make their theory of life, their way of seeing the
world, the only way. So often this fundamentalist approach - “My way or the
highway” - can lead to the very evil it was trying to avoid in the first place. Thus it
seems that one important hint we are learning about morality is that it is more
conducive to growth and maturity to include more rather than less.
One of the things I hope you have learned to appreciate throughout this course
and in your own wrestling with ethical issues is that ethical decisions are not as
easy as many would have us think. “W.D. Ross likened moral decision making to
the artistic process. According to Ross, there is no set formula for determining
which action we should take in a moral dilemma. The general duties themselves
may be self-evident, but judgments about our duties in a particular case are not.
Instead, we need to use reason and creativity to make judgments about our duty
in that situation. Ross believed that this lack of clarity is due to the nature of
moral decision making, which, he claimed, is more like creating a work of art than
solving a mathematical problem. The finished paintings might look very different,
but we are all painting from the same palette. Universal moral principles, like the
artist’s palette, provide the form rather than the specific content of our final
decision. Ross believed that, to demand ethicists provide us with predetermined
moral decisions is as unreasonable as artists demanding that their mentors tell
them exactly how their finished works should look” (Boss, p. 443.) We must not
let the lack of absolute certainty lead us to think that everything is purely
subjective. The great moral leaders of our world have far more in common than
not. Thoughtful people may not always do the right thing, but they are not nearly
the danger to civilized society as are people who do not bother to think and
reflect much at all.
Thoughtful people make use of the wisdom that has been handed down to us.
“Like any creative undertaking, moral decision making requires the proper tools
and expertise in reasoning, but it also demands that we personally enter into the
14
process. The sort of moral decisions we make says as much about the kind of
people we are as it does about the universal moral principles themselves. Thus,
in making satisfactory and well-informed moral decisions in your life, it is
important to know yourself and to constantly strive to overcome immature
defense mechanisms and narrow-mindedness and to become a more virtuous
and wise person” (Boss, p. 443.) The wonderful thing here is that as we
undertake the journey to lead a life of goodness we can see the fruits of such an
endeavor in our own level of growing serenity and peace.
Summary
We will conclude this class in the next lecture by returning to where we began,
the world of philosophy and questions. When people ask me how I can teach
ethics, I always tell them I can’t, really. All I can do is try to get people to think
and be self-reflective. Thankfully this alone seems to be enough. Just as we
cannot make plants grow, we can provide them with optimal conditions for growth
to naturally occur when the plant is ready to follow its own inner nature to
expand. It seems to me that ethical and philosophical education is very much the
same.
If plants need water and sunshine then I think students need Ken Wilber and
Jacob Needleman. In the last lecture I want to introduce you to the new field of
Integral Philosophy and how it can enhance our ability to exclude less and
include more. I will close the last lecture by having you study again the
importance of questions in philosophy and the Socratic method in particular to
help us all think more deeply about life and become more contemplative people.
In the process we will see the importance of dialogue, questioning, and selfknowledge in allowing philosophy to become not simply a subject studied, but a
way of life.
Until then, celebrate the virtuous life!
Bibliography:
Judith A. Boss, Ethics For Life: A Text With Readings, Fourth Edition, [New York,
New York: McGraw Hill, 2008]
Donald Palmer, Looking at Philosophy: The Unbearable Heaviness of Philosophy
Made Lighter, Fourth Edition, [New York, New York: McGraw Hill, 2006]
Bertrand Russell, A History of Western Philosophy, [New York, New York: Simon
and Schuster, 1945]
Richard Tarnas, The Passion of the Western Mind: Understanding the Ideas That
Have Shaped Our World View, [New York, New York: Harmony Books, 1991]
15
Bruce Waller, You Decide! Current Debates in Contemporary Moral Problems,
[New York, New York: Pearson, 2006]
16