VIRTUE ETHICS

CECIL P. DAGA
Teacher
 INTRODUCTION

An online news account narrates key officials

from both the legislative and executive branches
of the government voicing out their concern on
the possible ill effects of too much violence
seen by children on television.
❖ How does the continuous exposure to violence on
television affect the character that children
develop?
❖ ls it possible that constant watching of violence on
television results in aggression among children?
❖ What is the role of the child's environment in her
capacity to develop into a good individual?
 One theory that can possibly provide a
comprehensive understanding of how an individual
can develop moral character is

VIRTUE ETHICS
VIRTUE ETHICS
The ethical framework that is concerned with
understanding the good as a matter of
developing the virtuous character of a person.

Focuses on the formation of one's character

brought about by determining and doing
virtuous acts.
 PLATO The two major thinkers of Ancient
Greece, that had discourses concerning
ARISTOTLE virtue.

Nicomachean Ethics
The first comprehensive and
programmatic study of virtue ethics
 PLATO ARISTOTLE
• Affirm rationality as the Departs from the
The real is outside the
highest faculty of a Platonic understanding
realm of any human
person and having such of reality and conception
sensory experience but characteristic enables a
can be somehow be of the good.
person to realize the
grasped by one's very purpose of her
The real is found within our
intellect. The truth and, existence.
everyday encounter with
ultimately, the good are • They differ in their
appreciation of reality objects in the world. What
in the sphere of forms or
and nature, which, in makes nature intelligible is
ideas transcending daily
turn, results in their its character of having both
human condition.
contrasting stand on form and matter.
what the ethical
principle should be.
ARISTOTLE
When one speaks of the truth, for example, how
beautiful Juan Lunas Spoliarium is, she cannot discuss its
beauty separately from the particular painting itself. Same
is true with understanding the good: the particular act of
goodness that one does in the world is more important than
any conception of the good that is outside and beyond the
realm of experience.
 HAPPINESS AND ULTIMATE PURPOSE

Aristotle begins his discussion of ethics by showing that every

act that a person does is directed toward a particular purpose,
aim, or what the Greeks called telos.

For Aristotle, a person's action manifests a good that she

aspires for.

Therefore, for Aristotle, the good is considered to be the telos

or purpose for which all acts seek to achieve.
 Aristotle is aware that one does an act not only to achieve a
particular purpose but also believes such purpose can be utilized
for a higher goal or activity, which then can be used to achieve an
even higher purpose and so on.

HIERARCHY OF TELOI
✓ When one diligently writes down notes while listening to a
lecture given by the teacher, she does this for the purpose of
being able to remember the lessons of the course This
purpose of remembering, in turn, becomes an act to achieve a
higher aim which is to pass the examinations given by the
teacher, which then becomes a product that can help the
person attain the goal of having a passing mark in the course.

✓ It is important for Aristotle that one becomes clear of the

hierarchy of goals that the different acts produce in order for a
person to distinguish which actions are higher than the other.
 With the condition that there is a hierarchy of telos, Aristotle
then asks about the highest purpose, which is the ultimate good
of a human being.

General criteria in order for one to recognize the highest

good of man.

• Final - it is no longer utilized for the sake of arriving at a much

higher end.
• Self-sufficient - Satisfaction in life is arrived at once this
highest good is attained. Nothing else is sought after and
desired, once this self-sufficient goal is achieved, since this is
already considered as the best possible good in life.
 So what is the highest goal for Aristotle? What goal is both
final and self-sufficient?

It is interesting to note that for Aristotle, the question can only be

adequately answered by older individuals because they have gone
through enormous and challenging life experiences which helped
them gain a wealth of knowledge on what the ultimate purpose of a
person is.

According to Aristotle, older individuals would agree that the

highest purpose and the ultimate good of man is happiness, or for
the Greeks, eudaimonia.
 One can therefore say that happiness seems to fit the first
criterion of being the final end of a human being. For it is clear
that conditions for having wealth, power, and pleasures are not
chosen for themselves but for the sake of being a means to
achieve happiness.

Happiness for Aristotle is the only self-sufficient aim that one

can aspire for. No amount of wealth or power can be more
fulfilling than having achieved the condition of happiness.
How does a person arrive at her highest good?

According to Aristotle, if an individual's action can

achieve the highest good, then one must investigate how
she functions which enables her to achieve her ultimate
purpose. If she performs her function well, then she is
capable of arriving at happiness.
Aristotle then proceeds with discussing the function of
human beings to distinguish one person's activity from other
beings.
 How does a human being function which sets her apart
from the rest?
FUNCTION OR ACTIVITY OF
REASON
Aristotle expresses this clearly:
...What then can this be? Life seems to be common even to plants,
but we are seeking what is peculiar to man. Let us exclude,
therefore, the life of nutrition and growth. There would be a life of
perception, but it also seems to be common even to the horse, the
ox, and every animal. There remains, then, an active life of the
element that has a rational principle; of this, one part has such a
principle in the sense of being obedient to one, the other in the
sense of possessing one and exercising thought.
 What defines a person therefore is her function or
activity of reason.

A person's action to be considered as truly human must be an

act that is always in accordance to reason. The function of a
human being is to act following the dictates of her reason. Any
person for that matter utilizes her reason but Aristotle further says
that a person cannot only perform her function but she can also
perform it well.

What distinguishes a good person from other human beings is

her rational activity that is performed well or excellently. A good
individual therefore stands closer to meeting the conditions of
happiness because her actions are of a higher purpose.
 The local saying "Madaling maging tao, mahirap magpakatao"
can be understood in the light of Aristotle's thoughts on the
function of a good person. Any human being can perform the
activity of reason; thus, being human is achievable. However, a
good human being strives hard in doing an activity in an excellent
way. Therefore, the task of being human becomes more difficult
because doing such activity well takes more effort on the part of
the person.
 VIRTUE AS EXCELLENCE
Achieving the highest purpose of a human person concerns the
ability to function according to reason and to perform an activity
well or excellently.

VIRTUE OR ARETE
Something that one strives for in time. One does not
become an excellent person overnight
What exactly makes a human being excellent?

Aristotle says that excellence is an activity of the

human soul and therefore, one needs to understand
the very structure of a person's soul which must be
directed by her rational activity in an excellent way.
 HUMAN SOUL

Irrational Element Rational Faculty

Vegetative Appetitive
Aspect Aspect

Functions as giving nutrition and Works as a desiring faculty of man.

providing the activity of physical The act of desiring in itself is an
growth in a person impulse that naturally runs counter
Follows the natural processes to reason and most of the time
involved in the physical activities refuses to go along with reason.
and growth of a person. Thus, this aspect belongs to the
irrational part of the soul.
 HUMAN SOUL

Rational Faculty

Moral Intellectual
(concerns the act of doing) (concerns the act of knowing)
attained through teaching

Philosophic wisdom Practical wisdom

Deals with attaining knowledge An excellence in knowing the right
about the fundamental principles conduct in carrying out a particular
and truths that govern the universe act. In other words, one can attain
(e.g., general theory on the origins a wisdom that can provide us with
of things). a guide on how to behave in our
daily lives.
 HUMAN SOUL

Rational Faculty

Moral
(concerns the act of doing)

It is necessary for Aristotle is careful in making a sharp distinction

humans to attain the between moral and intellectual virtue. In itself,
intellectual virtue of having practical wisdom or the excellence in
practical wisdom in order knowing what to act upon does not make someone
to accomplish a morally already morally virtuous. Knowing the good is
virtuous act. different from determining and acting on what is
good. But a morally good person has to achieve the
intellectual virtue of practical wisdom to perform the
task of being moral.
• Therefore, rational faculty of a person tells us that she is capable
of achieving two kinds of virtue: moral and intellectual.

• In discussing moral virtue, Aristotle says that it is attained by

means of habit.

• A morally virtuous man for Aristotle is someone who habitually

determines the good and does the right actions.

• Being morally good is a process of getting used to doing the

proper act.
• A moral person habitually chooses the good and consistently
does good deeds.
• It is in this constant act of choosing and doing the good that a
person is able to form her character.
• It is through one's character that others know a person.
• Character then becomes the identification mark of the person.
• The Filipino term pag-uugali precisely reflects the meaning of
moral character. One can have mabuting pag-uugali (good
character) or masamang pag-uugali (bad character).
 How does the continuous exposure to violence on
television affect the kind of character that children
will develop?

One can surmise that if we rely on the above-mentioned

study, children tend to mimic the violence they watch on
television and such habit could develop into a character that
can tolerate behaviours that are hostile in nature.
 MORAL VIRTUE AND MESOTES

As stated by Aristotle, developing a practical wisdom

involves learning from experiences. Knowledge is not
inherent to a person. Knowing the right thing to do when
one is confronted by a choice is not easy. One needs to
develop this knowledge by exercising the faculty of
practical reason in her daily life.
However, when practical wisdom guides the conduct of
making morally right choices and actions, what does it
identify as the proper and right thing to do?

MESOTES
(middle, intermediate)

Determining the middle becomes the proper tool by which

one can arrive at the proper way of doing things.
• Based on Aristotle, a morally virtuous person is concerned
with achieving her appropriate action in a manner that is
neither excessive nor deficient.

• In other words, virtue is the middle or the intermediary

point in between extremes.

• One has to function in a state that her personality manifests

the right amount of feelings, passions, and ability for a
particular act.
• A morally virtuous person targets the mesotes.

• For Aristotle, the task of targeting the mean is always difficult

because every situation is different from one another.

• Thus, the mesotes is constantly moving depending on the

circumstance where she is in. The mean is not the same for all
individuals.

• Therefore, the task of being moral involves seriously looking

into and understanding a situation and assessing properly every
particular detail relevant to the determination of the mean.
• Mesotes determines whether the act applied is not excessive or
deficient.

• Likewise, an individual cannot be good at doing something

haphazardly but reason demands a continuous habituation of a
skill to perfect an act.

• Targeting the middle entails being immersed in a moral

circumstance, understanding the experience, and eventually,
developing the knowledge of identifying the proper way or the
mean to address a particular situation.
 Aristotle's discussion ultimately leads to defining
what exactly moral virtue is – “a state of character
concerned with choice, lying in a mean, that is, the mean
relative to us, this being determined by a rational principle,
and by that principle by which the man of practical wisdom
would determine it.”
 Moral virtue is:
• Firstly the condition arrived at by a person who has a character
identified out of her habitual exercise of particular actions.

• Secondly, in moral virtue, the action done that normally manifests

feelings and passions is chosen because it is the middle. This
means that in choosing the middle, one is looking at the situation
and not at oneself in identifying the proper way that feelings and
passions should be dispensed.

• Thirdly, the rational faculty that serves as a guide for the proper
identification of the middle is practical wisdom.
 Aristotle clarifies further that not all feelings, passions,
and actions have a middle point. When a mean is sought, it
is in the context of being able to identify the good act in a
given situation. However, when what is involved is seen as
a bad feeling, passion, or action, the middle is non-existent
because there is no good (mesotes) in something that is
already considered a bad act.
 Aristotle also provides examples of particular virtues and the
corresponding excesses and deficiencies of these. This table
shows some of the virtues and their vices:

Excess Middle Deficiency

Impulsiveness Self-control Indecisiveness

Recklessness Courage Cowardice

Prodigality Liberality Meanness

 It is only through the middle that a person is able to
manifest her feelings, passions, and actions virtuously.
For Aristotle, being superfluous with regard to
manifesting a virtue is no longer an ethical act because
one has gone beyond the middle.