Download Aristotle on Human Excellence

Moral Theory
Mark Pursley
Issues in Moral Theory


Do statements
containing value
terms have a truth
value?
If so, what are the
truth conditions for
value claims?


Are relativist or
subjectivist accounts
of moral language
plausible?
How does a
community reach a
consensus about
moral issues?
Virtue Theory


Plato and Aristotle
offer virtue theories
of ethics.
Virtue theories rely
on an analogy
between health (the
good of the body)
and eudaimonia (the
good of the mind).
Aristotle on Human Excellence

A virtue (arete, excellence) is a
character trait, acquired by practice,
that disposes a person to adopt the
right course of action in morally
charged situations. Virtues are lifeskills that enable a person to realize
their potential for living the good life as
a rational, social, animal.
Are we not more likely to hit
the mark if we have a target?


Good= the aim,
end, or goal (telos)
of an activity. What
is the goal (final
end) of living a
human life? All
agree: Happiness
(eudaimonia, wellbeing, flourishing).
What is happiness?





Pleasure? No, too
Brutish.
Wealth? No, it’s a
means, not a final end.
Honor? No, it’s not selfsufficient.
Virtue? No, it’s not
complete.
The end sought must
be final, self-sufficient,
and complete.
What is the function of human
life?

To find the human good, find the
human function (ergon, what a thing does
that makes it what it is). What is the
characteristically human activity? Nutrition
and growth? (No, all living things);
Sensation? (No, all animals); Rational activity.
Function of a good human: rational activity in
accordance with virtue. [Objectors ask: Are
evil people irrational?]
Becoming Excellent

As a skill or craft,
virtue is acquired by
practice. Patterns of
behavior produce
states of character.
Good character
produces good
behavior. If you
imitate good people,
you’ll become one.

Moral virtues control
natural feelings
(passions, appetites)
and actions, making
them arise in the
right amounts at the
right times for the
right reasons (such a
rule or principle as would
arise in the mind of the
practically wise person).
Virtue: a mean between
extremes

Confidence, appetites, anger, giving $.
Excess
Mean
Deficiency
Foolhardiness Courage
Cowardice

Indulgence




Temperance
Hot head
Cool head
Too generous Generous
Insensibility
Apathetic
Stingy
Character Types



Heroic:
extraordinary
goodness.
Virtuous: Takes
pleasure in doing
good.
Continent: Must
control bodily
desires in order to
do good.



Incontinent: Try's,
but fails, to control
bodily desires, and
so does evil.
Vicious: Takes
pleasure in doing
evil.
Bestial: Subhumanly
wicked.
Immanuel Kant (17241804)


Defends a deontological
approach to morality.
Everyone must admit
that if a law is to be
morally valid…then it
must carry with it
absolute necessity.
The ground of
obligation…must be
sought apriori in the
concepts of pure
reason.
Kantian Ethics

Morality is a sacred duty, not a means
to happiness. (A good will is more
important than a good life.) Reason can
discern the moral law. The will chooses
which actions to perform. Inclination
reflects how one feels about one’s
options. When reason (not inclination)
directs the will, one does one’s duty.
The motive of duty.

Acting from inclination
or acting from duty. An
action has moral worth
if and only if it is done
from the motive of
duty. The prudent
shopkeeper acts
honestly because it is
good policy. Such acts
have no moral worth.
Nor do the kind acts of
helpful people.



The cold, uncaring
person who helps
others because duty
commands it, has moral
worth.
Hypothetical imperative,
if you want x, do j.
Conditional.
Categorical imperative:
Unconditional
commands. Do X!
(Whether you like it or not.)
The Categorical Imperative


Act only on a maxim which you could (at that
time) will to become a universal law.
Act as if the maxim of your action would
instantly become a general law of nature.
Maxim: I do action x in circumstances C to obtain end E.
1. Find the maxim; 2. Universalize; 3. Imagine the universalized
maxim as a natural law; 4. Ask “Is this a possible law of nature?”
5. Ask “Can one will this to be a law of nature?”
CI 3: Act so as to treat humanity (yourself and others) always as
an end, never merely as a means.
Consequentialism

Consequentialist
theories hold that
the goodness or
badness of actions
resides in the
consequences those
actions produce.
J.S. Mill’s
Utilitarianism is the
leading theory.
Mill’s Utilitarianism

Greatest Happiness Principle: Actions are
right in proportion as they tend to promote
happiness, wrong as they tend to promote
the reverse of happiness. Happiness is
pleasure and freedom from pain.
Unhappiness is pain and the privation of
pleasure. Not an invitation to indulgence: A
beasts pleasures do not satisfy a human
being’s conception of happiness.
Ways to Measure Pleasure:
Quantity and Quality.

Pleasure is not just a
matter of quantity.
Higher quality
pleasures (like using
one’s mind,
creativity, doing
good deeds, having
friends) are more
desirable and make
life more worth
living than mere
bodily sensations.

Aim of utilitarianism:
An existence exempt
as far as possible
from pain, and as
rich as possible in
enjoyments, both in
point of quantity and
quality. Morality
consists in the rules
which, if followed,
would secure this
end for all sentients.
Utilitarianism and Justice


A standard objection to utilitarianism alleges that the
theory will require the use of unjust means whenever
doing so is likely to produce a greater balance of
pleasure. This would permit a policy of punishing the
innocent to avert a riot, to deter wrongdoers, etc.
Utilitarians may respond by pointing out that, in fact,
no society which falsely accuses innocent citizens will
promote a greater balance of pleasure in the long
run. The greater good can only be attained in a
society that upholds basic principles of justice (e.g..
the guilty are punished and the innocent acquitted).
Alfred Jules Ayer 1910- 1989




Language, Truth, and
Logic.
A defense of “radical
empiricism.”
Logical Positivism
Argues that
metaphysical,
theological, and moral
propositions are
meaningless.
Ayer’s Critique of Utilitarianism


Verificationism: An
empirical hypothesis is
significant (legitimate)
only if some possible
sense experience is
relevant for determining
its truth or falsity.
Utilitarianism claims
actions are good if they
produce pleasure or
reduce pain.

We cannot agree that to
call an action right is to
say...it would
cause...the greatest
balance of
pleasure...because it is
not self-contradictory to
say it is....wrong to
perform the action that
would...cause the
greatest happiness.
Ayer’s Emotivism



Since absolutist theories are unverifiable, and
naturalistic theories violate linguistic convention,
moral propositions are simply expressions of approval
or disapproval.
Adultery is wrong just means I disapprove of
adultery, or Boo! adultery!
Realist response: Moral propositions may express
emotions but it is still legitimate to ask about the
sorts of conditions that appropriately evoke approval
or disapproval.