Aristotle virtue ethics

Aristotle’s argument for the ultimate good

1. Everything we do is aimed at some good

2. Each good is also done for the sake of a higher good

3. This can’t go on forever (otherwise the aim would be pointless)

4. Therefore there must be an ultimate good, which everything we do is aimed towards

Criticisms of Aristotle’s argument for the ultimate good

Some actions don’t have purpose e.g. day dreaming or doodling

Argument commits the fallacy of composition - “all human beings have a mother, therefore there is one mother that all human beings have”

Eudaimonia

The ultimate good/ final end ‘flourishing’

Aristotle’s Approach to Eudaimonia as the ultimate good

1. Empirical Approach:

Aristotle examines common views on the good life and rejects:

– Pleasure (fit for animals)

– Wealth (a means, not an end)

– Honour (depends on others)

– Goodness (can exist with suffering)

He concludes these don’t capture true flourishing.

2. Conceptual Approach:

The final end must be:

– An end in itself, never just a means

– The most final goal

– Self-sufficient (complete on its own)

– Most desirable of all things

Eudaimonia (living well/flourishing) fits all of these—so it must be the ultimate good.

Relationship between Eudaimonia and Pleasure

• Aristotle rejects hedonism: pleasure is not the final end or the good itself.

• Pleasure doesn’t meet the criteria for the ultimate good (e.g. self-sufficiency).

• We aim for things like virtue, even if they’re not always pleasurable.

However:

• He also rejects asceticism — pleasure is a part of the good life.

• The good life involves pleasure, but as a by-product of virtuous activity.

• Physical pleasures are fine in moderation; avoiding them entirely is a vice.

• Virtue becomes pleasurable over time — pleasure completes virtuous action.

• The highest pleasure comes from philosophical contemplation.

The function argument

• Everything has a function (ergon), including humans.

• A thing is good when it performs its function well (with excellence = aretē).

• The human function is reason (rational activity), since it’s unique to us.

• So, the good life = rational activity in accordance with virtue over a full life.

• This leads to eudaimonia — the final end for human beings.

Criticisms of function argument

• Not all things have a function — the idea that humans do may be a weak analogy.

• Circular reasoning — Aristotle defines virtue as performing our function well… but then uses virtue to define the function.

• Is–Ought gap — just because we can reason doesn’t mean we ought to live by it.

• Too narrow — focuses on reason, ignoring other ways humans may flourish (emotion, relationships, creativity).

Virtue as character traits or dispositions

• For Aristotle, virtues are stable dispositions — deep traits that guide how we act, feel, and respond.

• Not just actions, but how we act: consistently, with the right motives and feelings.

• Virtues lie between two extremes (the Doctrine of the Mean) — e.g., courage is between cowardice and rashness.

• We develop virtues through habit and practice, not just theory.

The Role of Education and Habituation in Developing Moral Character

• Aristotle says we become virtuous by doing virtuous acts — not just knowing about them.

• Habituation: Repeated practice of right actions shapes our character over time.

• Education trains us to recognise the mean and develop good judgement.

• Moral virtues are formed through experience, not just reason — like learning a skill.

• We need good upbringing and role models to start on the right path.

The skill analogy

• Virtue is like a practical skill — learned through practice, not just theory.

• We become virtuous by repeating good actions until they become habits.

• Like mastering a skill, it takes experience, guidance, and time.

• At first we just copy; later we act with understanding and intention.

The importance of feelings

• Virtue isn’t just about doing the right thing, but doing it with the right feelings.

• Feelings help us judge how to act — e.g. fear guides courage, empathy guides kindness.

• Acting with excess or deficiency of feeling leads to vice.

• The virtuous person feels pleasure in good actions and discomfort in bad ones.

Doctrine of the mean

• Virtue lies at the mean between two extremes (vices): excess and deficiency.

• The “mean” is relative to the individual and situation.

• Finding the mean requires practical wisdom (phronesis).

Criticism of doctrine of mean

• Some virtues aren’t means but absolutes (e.g., justice or honesty).

• The “mean” can be vague or subjective, hard to apply in complex cases.

• Doesn’t clearly guide when extreme action is required (e.g., extreme courage in war).

• May justify moral mediocrity — settling for the middle rather than the best.

• Critics say it depends heavily on practical wisdom, which not everyone has.

Voluntary actions

• Voluntary actions are done with knowledge and control.

• They reflect the agent’s character and responsibility.

• Only voluntary actions can be the basis for moral praise or blame.

Involuntary actions

• Done out of ignorance or under compulsion.

• Cause pity or forgiveness, not blame.

• Can be partly involuntary if the agent regrets the action.

• Not the basis for moral responsibility

Non-voluntary actions

• Done from ignorance, but without regret afterward.

• Not forced or fully deliberate.

• Different from involuntary because there’s no remorse.

• Limited moral responsibility, but less excused than involuntary acts.

Relationship Between Virtues, Actions, and Reasons

• Virtues are stable traits that guide our actions.

• Virtuous actions are done for the right reasons, not just by habit.

• True virtue involves knowing why an action is right and choosing it willingly.

• Actions without the right reasons may be correct but not virtuous.

The Role of Practical Reasoning (Phronesis)

• Practical wisdom (phronesis) is the ability to make good moral decisions.

• It helps find the right mean in varying situations.

• Combines experience, reason, and moral insight.

• Essential for applying virtues effectively in real life.

Criticism of Practical Reasoning (Phronesis)

• Vague and subjective — what counts as “practical wisdom” can vary widely.

• Assumes everyone can develop it equally — unrealistic given different backgrounds.

• Relies heavily on experience, which can lead to biased or flawed judgments.

• Doesn’t clearly solve conflicts between virtues or moral dilemmas.

Does Virtue Ethics Give Clear Guidance on How to Act?

• Virtue ethics focuses on developing good character, not strict rules.

• It provides flexible guidance through virtues and practical wisdom.

• Critics say it can be vague and subjective, offering less clear “dos and don’ts.”

• Supporters argue it fits complex, real-life situations better than rigid rules.

Criticism: Virtue Ethics and Clear Guidance

• Lacks specific rules, making it hard to know what to do in tricky cases.

• Virtues can conflict, leaving no clear way to choose.

• Different cultures may value different virtues, causing confusion.

• Relies on practical wisdom, which not everyone has or can develop easily.

Can Virtue Ethics Deal with Clashing Virtues?

• Virtue ethics acknowledges virtues can conflict in real situations.

• Resolving clashes relies on practical wisdom (phronesis) to balance competing demands.

• No fixed formula — requires judgment, context, and experience.

• Critics say this makes decisions uncertain and subjective.

Possibility of Circularity in Virtue Ethics

• Virtue ethics can be circular: virtues are defined as traits that lead to good actions, but good actions are those done by virtuous people.

• This risks defining virtue by virtue, offering little independent guidance.

• Critics argue it fails to explain why specific traits are virtuous.

• Supporters say character and action are naturally linked, so some circularity is unavoidable.

Must a Trait Contribute to Eudaimonia to Be a Virtue?

• In Aristotle’s ethics, yes — a virtue is a trait that helps us flourish (eudaimonia).

• Traits that hinder flourishing aren’t virtues, even if socially admired.

• Virtues promote living well and fulfilling our purpose as humans.

• Some modern thinkers debate whether all virtues must link directly to eudaimonia.

What is the Moral Good for the Individual?

• For Aristotle, moral good = eudaimonia (flourishing or living well).

• It’s about fulfilling our human function through virtue.

• Moral good isn’t just about pleasure or external success

How Does the Individual Achieve Moral Good?

• By developing virtues through habituation and reason.

• Acting voluntarily and for the right reasons.

• Using practical wisdom to make good choices in life.

Is moral good individual or social?

• Aristotle says humans are social animals — moral good includes living well with others.

• Virtues like justice and friendship show the social nature of moral good.

• Eudaimonia involves both personal excellence and community harmony.