comparison

holistic approach vs rule based morality: VE

• Virtue ethics, rooted in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, is often praised for its holistic approach, focusing on the character of the moral agent rather than isolated actions.

• Alasdair MacIntyre, in After Virtue, argues that virtue ethics is superior because it integrates moral reasoning with lived experiences and social practices.

• By cultivating virtues like courage, justice, and temperance, individuals work toward eudaimonia (flourishing), which is a universal human goal.

• Unlike deontology, virtue ethics recognizes the complexity of human relationships and emotions, allowing for flexibility in moral decision-making.

• For example, in cases of lying to protect someone, virtue ethics evaluates the agent’s intention and character rather than rigidly adhering to a prohibition on lying.

• Rosalind Hursthouse adds that virtues inherently guide actions without requiring explicit rules, making the theory adaptable to diverse moral situations.

Holistic approach vs Rule based morality: KD

• In contrast, Kant’s deontology insists on adherence to universal moral laws, guided by the categorical imperative. Kant argues that moral worth arises from acting out of duty, not inclination, ensuring objectivity and fairness.

• However, critics like Bernard Williams contend that this rule-based morality often neglects emotional and relational factors, leading to outcomes that seem morally counterintuitive, such as condemning lying even to save a life.

• Virtue ethics appears more nuanced and aligned with real-life moral complexities. However, critics like mackie acknowledge that virtue ethics lacks clear action-guidance in urgent scenarios, which Kantian deontology provides through universal principles.

Moral motivation and practical wisdom: VE

• Virtue ethics emphasizes moral motivation through the cultivation of phronesis (practical wisdom).

• Aristotle argues that virtues are developed through practice, enabling individuals to make morally appropriate decisions based on the context.

• This focus on character formation allows individuals to navigate complex moral dilemmas intuitively, fostering long-term ethical development.

• Alasdair MacIntyre supports this by emphasizing that virtues are embedded within social traditions and communities, making them culturally relevant and adaptable.

• For instance, courage might manifest differently in various societies but still promote individual and collective flourishing. Virtue ethics also integrates moral emotions like empathy and compassion, which are central to human interactions.

Moral motivation and practical wisdom: KD

• Kantian ethics, while offering clear guidelines, lacks this emphasis on personal development.

• Moral actions are judged by adherence to duty rather than by the character or motivation of the moral agent

• Critics like Michael Stocker argue that this creates a “schizophrenia in moral life,” as individuals might act out of duty without genuine emotional engagement.

• While Kantian deontology provides moral consistency, virtue ethics encourages genuine moral growth.

• However, its reliance on moral intuition and context might lead to inconsistencies, as W.D. Ross notes in his critique of virtue ethics’ subjectivity.

Contextual Flexibility vs. Universal Consistency: VE

• Virtue ethics excels in contextual flexibility, allowing individuals to adapt their decisions based on the situation.

• Rosalind Hursthouse illustrates this by showing how virtues guide moral reasoning without the rigidity of universal rules.

• For instance, the virtue of compassion might justify bending conventional rules in exceptional circumstances, such as lying to save a life.

Contextual Flexibility vs. Universal Consistency: KD

• In contrast, Kantian deontology prioritizes universal consistency through the categorical imperative.

• By emphasizing duties that apply universally, deontology ensures impartiality and fairness.

• However, critics like J.J.C. Smart argue that this rigidity makes it impractical in situations requiring contextual sensitivity. For example, Kant’s prohibition of lying, even to save a life, seems morally counterintuitive.

• Virtue ethics’ flexibility makes it more applicable in complex and nuanced situations.

• However, its lack of clear decision-making criteria can lead to subjective interpretations.

• Kantian deontology, while rigid, provides a reliable moral framework for ensuring fairness and consistency in decision-making.