Download William Moran Ethics: Virtue Dr. Faulders Character It is often said

William Moran
Ethics: Virtue
Dr. Faulders
Character
It is often said that a man is judged by his character. Martin Luther King fought for the
day when a man be judged by his character and not the color of his skin. John Adams said “The
people "have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded
and envied kind of knowledge-- I mean of the character and conduct of their rulers”. And the
Bible says;”By his inclinations a child is known, if his works be clean and right” ( KJV,
Proverbs 20:11).
The Oxford dictionary defines character as the mental and moral qualities
distinctive to an individual. Simply put the character of a person is how he or she thinks and
subsequently how they act in accordance with those thoughts. Aristotle emphasized the
importance of developing excellence or virtue of character (Greek "ethikē aretē"), as the way to
achieve what is finally more important, excellent activity (Greek energeia). As Aristotle argues
in Book II of the Nicomachean Ethics, the man who possesses character excellence does the right
thing, at the right time, and in the right way.
According to its etymology the word virtue (Latin virtus) signifies manliness or courage.
"Appelata est enim a viro virtus: viri autem propria maxime est fortitudo" ("The term virtue is
from the word that signifies man; a man's chief quality is fortitude"; Cicero, "Tuscul.", I, xi, 18).
Taken in its widest sense virtue means the excellence or perfection of a thing, just as vice, its
contrary, denotes a defect or absence of perfection due to a thing. In its strictest meaning,
however, as used by moral philosophers and theologians, it signifies a habit super-added to a
faculty of the soul, disposing it to elicit with readiness acts conformable to our rational
nature.(Catholic Encyclopedia, 472) In his book on Catholic theology titled Theology and Sanity,
Frank Sheed says; “the soul has two functions one is the ability to love and the other is the
intellect”. (8) Often overlooked, intellectual virtue can help lead us to correct moral judgments.
Contrary to this is relying solely on the part of the soul that deals with feelings and love. Both
parts need the other to properly guide the formation of the man with good character.
Like many ethicists, Aristotle regards excellent activity as pleasurable for the man of
virtue. For example, Aristotle thinks that the man whose appetites are in the correct order
actually takes pleasure in acting moderately.
Man finds in himself natural inclinations some of which care considered good and some
of which poor. If a man has the natural inclination to be generous then this is not a virtue because
it he is simply following his natural inclination. However if the same man has a natural
inclination to be selfish and fights against this inclination and performs acts of charity then he is
thought to be virtuous. Virtue is moving in the opposite direction of our natural inclinations. For
that reason a rock unlike a man cannot go against its inclinations, and therefore must always fall
to the ground when dropped. It cannot be trained, educated or convinced in any manner to not
fall to the ground. Humans however, posses the unique ability to move away or towards
inclinations for either good or bad reasons.
Like any other craft we must learn to virtuous and this should start at a young age. If a
child’s moral growth does not keep pace with his physical growth there may soon be no child.
Could this explain why the most common age for suicide today is adolescence?...However to
practice morality, we must first know it. To be men and women of virtue, not vice we must know
what virtue and vice mean. (Peter Kreeft)
Man can use his properly trained intellect to see what is true and use this knowledge to
inform his thoughts and not rely on feelings. Feelings are indeed real and need not be discarded
but they must not be the sole guide of our actions. For example: if I feel cold and it is the middle
of summer with temperatures in the 90 degree range my feelings would indicate I may have an
illness and I should seek medical attention. To ignore the feeling of cold in high temperatures
would be negligent and most likely result in a more serious illness. Likewise if I have a feeling to
act in a certain manner I need to evaluate that feeling to compare it to the reality around me. If I
find in myself the feeling to have an ice-cream bar and have no means to acquire the ice-cream I
may find a feeling to just take one, steal it. My natural inclination maybe to take the ice-cream
but hopefully if I have developed the correct virtues I go against such an inclination.
And so the man of character is the man who has developed his thoughts and actions to act
in accordance with correct moral choices. Aristotle thought there to be two kinds of virtue
intellectual and moral. The former we acquire through education and the latter through habit.
Aristotle identifies ethical virtue as "a habit, disposed toward action by deliberate choice, being
at the mean relative to us, and defined by reason as a prudent man would define it" (1107a). A
crucial distinction exists between being virtuous and acting virtuously. To qualify as virtuous,
one must not merely act virtuously, but also know he is acting virtuously, intend to do what he
does for its own sake, and act with certainty and firmness (1105b). Acting virtuously, however,
is the primary means to becoming virtuous. For, according to Aristotle, "virtues arise in us
neither by nature nor contrary to nature; but by our nature we can receive them and perfect them
by habituation" (1103a).
Aristotle proposes three criteria to distinguish virtuous people from people who behave in
the right way by accident: first, virtuous people know they are behaving in the right way; second,
they choose to behave in the right way for the sake of being virtuous; and third, their behavior
manifests itself as part of a fixed, virtuous disposition.
In his attempt to explain the theory of moral virtue and, for that matter, the central goal,
eudaimonia, Aristotle describes the important concept of finding middle ground in one’s life or,
achieving a balance. In line with the theory of moral virtue Aristotle contends that to achieve
these aims and reach eudaimonia, one of the most important lessons Aristotle teaches in the
theory of moral virtue is strike a balance, or hit a mean between extremes in behavior, thought,
and action. In the theory of moral virtue, Aristotle states that we must act knowingly and do the
right thing because it is right, not because there is a personal stake in terms of the future
possibility of pleasure or pain. In short, in this theory, what is morally right or wrong is
something we understand in an intellectual sense and we apply this knowledge of moral behavior
through our practice and habituation of moral virtues.
Drawing from Aristotle St. Thomas Aquinas defined the cardinal virtues of human life as
being prudence, temperance, justice, and fortitude. These virtues are revealed in nature and make
up the foundations of natural law. To Aquinas, humanity naturally strives to achieve ends
through the use of reason. Because of innate imperfection, these qualities are not always adhered
to but are necessary for facilitating a rising standard of living. Without temperance, the present
is indulged to rather than the future.
In The Abolition of Man C.S. Lewis writes: “There is something which unites magic and
applied science (technology) while separating them from the “wisdom” of earlier ages. For the
wise men of old, the cardinal problem of human life was how to conform the soul to objective
reality, and the solution was wisdom, self discipline, and virtue. For the modern, the cardinal
problem is how to conform reality to the wishes of man, and the solution is a technique”
Aristotle would probably be found standing on his head today as modernity has rapidly
departed from his idea that we can move away from our natural inclinations towards a mean and
develop virtue and therefore become men and women of character. Modernity attempting to
comport to some form of morality rejects the idea either in whole or in part that we can or should
move away from inclinations. It asks that we instead embrace our inclinations and then defines
the man of character as man that is “good”. And good is left to each individual to define for
themselves and therefore a constantly changing subjective idea, i.e. relativism. It subjugates men
to that of the flames of fire reaching for the sky which are no better suited to fall to the ground
then the rock dropped from our hand. Modern psychology and philosophy say we cannot ask a
fire or a rock to violate its natural inclinations nor should we expect man to violate his own
inclinations of selfishness, greed and the rest…
Instead of asking man to wrestle with his inclinations we should be tolerant of each
individual’s behavior. Where exactly the line of tolerance is drawn remains fuzzy and without
any objective ideas of good and bad to draw from will remain that way despite the modern mans
attempt at some scientific answer to our ethical questions. As G.K. Chesterton put it “tolerance is
the virtue of the man without convictions”.
The Catholic Encyclopedia volume 15 Robert Appleton company 1912
http://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/virtue
C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man ( New York: Macmillan, 1943), 87-88
Kreeft, Peter; Back to Virtue 1992 Ignatius Press, San Francisco
Sheed Frank Theology and Sanity Ignatius press