Virtue Ethics
Deontological ethics and utilitarian ethics are called “the ethics of doing.” In contrast, virtue ethics is “the ethics of being.”
John Stuart Mill wrote that “Ninety-nine hundredths of all our actions are done from other [than moral] motives, and rightly so done if the rule of duty does not condemn them.” What this implies is that a utilitarian theory provides guidance on framing and solving certain kinds of moral problems. It is not intended to apply to every choice you make or action you undertake.
But, intuitively, most of us believe that normativity extends beyond solving big problems. Leading a good life is built up on daily habits and is not only the result of making the right choice at critical junctures. Virtue ethics speaks to this by casting morality as a matter of constantly building moral character.
We could find some weaknesses with virtue ethics as a way of characterizing morality, too. Such weaknesses don’t indicate that we should reject it, necessarily; rather, they are intended to show where the theory needs to be filled out and where it has to be applied cautiously.
One such weakness is that there is sometimes a fine line between virtue and vice. We don’t all admire the same people, or admire them for the same reasons. Is a politician who changes her mind on an issue an indecisive “flip-flopper” or someone who considers evidence and is not afraid to admit she was wrong?
How wide is the gap that separates being committed from being a fanatic? Or the difference between displaying perseverance and being stubborn? between being enthusiastic and being a zealot? between being cautious and being timid? between being assertive and being aggressive? between being confident and being an egomaniac?
*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture.
