Basic Theories and Frameworks in Ethics a.

Moral realism claims that the existence of moral

facts and the truth (or falsity) of moral judgments are
Ethics today generally divide the study of morality into independent of people’s thoughts and perceptions. It
three general subject areas: (1) meta-ethics,
maintains that morality is about objective facts, that is,
(2) normative ethics, and (3) applied ethics. Under not facts about any person or group’s subjective
these respective areas are various moral theories and judgment.
frameworks.
b. Ethical subjectivism holds that the truth (or
1. META-ETHICS falsity) of ethical proposition are dependent on the
Meta-ethics is a branch of analytic philosophy that attitudes or standards of a person or group of persons.
explores the status, foundations, and scope of moral It is obviously contrary to moral realism.
values, properties, and words. Whereas the fields of Non-cognitivism denies that moral judgments are either
Applied Ethics and Normative Theory focus on what is true or false. It claims that ethical sentences do not
moral, meta-ethics focuses on what morality itself is.
convey authentic propositions, hence, they are neither
Meta-ethics deals with questions like the following: true nor false.
Are there objective moral truths? Emotivism is the most popular form of non-
What do the words “good”, “bad”, “right”, and cognitivist theory. It claims that moral judgments are
“wrong” mean? mere expressions of our emotions and feelings.

Are moral judgments a matter of subjective Universalism vs Relativism

personal feeling? a. Moral Universalism theorizes that moral facts and
If we say “Slavery is wrong”, are we just making a claim principles apply to everybody in all places. It is also
about our customs or are we making an objective called moral objectivism and claims that a universal
declaration that is true regardless of what anybody may ethic exists and that this applies to all similarly situated
think? persons regardless of nationality, citizenship, culture,
race, gender, sexual preference, religion, or any other
How can we know if something is right or wrong? differentiating factors. Believing that some behaviors
are simply wrong, it also submits that if something is
Meta-ethical theories are classified semantically as
right for one, then, it is right for another. Moral
either cognitivist or non-cognitivist.
universalism is very much compatible with moral
Meta-ethical theories are classified substantially as realism.
either universalist or relativist.
b. Moral Relativism claims that different moral facts
Meta-ethical theories are classified epistemologically as and principles apply to different persons or group of
either empiricist, rationalist, or intuitionalist. individuals. Believing that different cultures have
distinct standards of right and wrong, it maintains
Cognitivism vs Non-cognitivism that ethical standards also change over time even in
the same culture. It claims that there is no single
Cognitivism states that moral judgments convey
objective standard for morality and that all moral
propositions, that is, they are “truth bearers” or they
norms are equally true and morals are mere
are either true or false. They contend that right and
preferences. It is very much compatible with ethical
wrong are matters of fact. The most famous forms of
subjectivism.
cognitive ethics are moral realism and ethical
subjectivism.
Empiricism vs Rationalism vs Intuitionism Normative ethical theories are generally categorized
into three kinds: deontological, teleological, and virtue
a. Moral Empiricism claims that moral facts ethics.
are known through observation and experience. It is an
extension of empiricism in epistemology which states Deontology
that all knowledge of matters of fact is derived from
experience and that our mind is not equipped with pre- Deontology is an ethical system that bases morality on
experience concepts. Moral empiricism holds that moral independent moral rules or duties. The term came
truths are reducible to matters about people’s opinions from the Greek word deon, which means duty, implying
the foundational nature of man’s duties and obligations.
or cultural conventions and thus are recognizable by
observation of their conventions. It basically claims that the morality of an action should
be based on whether that action itself is right or wrong
b. Moral Rationalism states that moral facts and under a series of rules, rather than based on the
principles are knowable a priori, that is, by reason consequences of the action. Deontology is a school of
alone and without reference to experience. In moral philosophy in which ethical behavior is
epistemology, rationalism states that knowledge about equivalent to following rules. Deontologists believe
reality are gained through non-empirical deductive that the goal of moral philosophy should be to figure
system. According to this theory, moral facts can be out the “rules” for living a moral life and that once
known through rational inferential process. The theory people know those rules they should follow them.
relies on reason rather than intuition in justifying a “The Golden Rule” (do unto others as you would have
belief or action. them do unto you) is an example of deontology; it’s a
moral rule meant to be followed in all situations, for
c. Moral Intuitionism claims that moral truths are everyone to live moral lives. This theory is also
knowable by intuition, that is, by immediate instinctive called nonconsequentialism since principles are
knowledge without reference to any evidence. The
obligatory regardless of the consequences that actions
theory claims that we have intuitive awareness of value might produce.
or morality and that it defines the basis of our ethical
knowledge. It insists that the moral value of actions Teleology
may be known intuitively, even if their consequences
have not been uncovered. Teleology refers to a moral system that determines the
moral value of actions by their outcomes or results.
2. NORMATIVE ETHICS From the Greek word telos, which means end, teleology
takes into account the end result of the action as the
Normative ethics is the branch of ethics that studies exclusive consideration of its morality. Its focus is on the
how man should act, morally speaking. It examines goal of the ethical action. Teleology bases moral
ethical norms, that is, those guidelines about what is judgements on the outcomes of a decision or an
right, worthwhile, virtuous, or just. This branch
action. If the outcomes of an action are considered to
evaluates standards for the rightness and wrongness of be positive, or to give rise to benefits, then that action
actions and determines a moral course of action. It is is held to be morally right. Conversely, if the outcome
prescriptive in nature. It addresses specific moral causes harm, then the action is held to be morally
questions about what we should do or believe. We do
wrong. The judgement of right or wrong depends on
normative ethics if we justify norms like “Discrimination the consequences of the decision or action. It’s most
is wrong” or “We must always act in accordance with famous form is consequentialism which proposes that
our duty”. If meta-ethics deals with the question, “What morality is determined solely by a cost-
is goodness?”, normative ethics try to answer the benefit evaluation of the action’s consequences. Thus,
question, “What ought one to do?”.
it is the consequences that make actions, good or bad,
right or wrong. From a teleological standpoint, stealing,
for example, would be deemed right or wrong
depending on the consequences. Suppose I were to determine the ethically correct course of action in
contemplating stealing a loaf of bread from the specific realms of human actions.
neighborhood grocery store. My motive alone would
For a subject to be considered as an applied ethical
have nothing to do with the rightness or wrongness of
the act. What really matters lies in the potential short- issue, not only must it be a matter of moral judgment,
term and long-term consequences. If my children were but also it has to be controversial. That is, there must be
starving, and if stealing a loaf of bread would considerable groups of people both for and against the
immediately prevent them from starving, then I might issue.
seriously consider stealing. But I’d have to know if the Applied ethical issues nowadays are classified into
consequences would significantly harm the grocery various sub-fields:
store? What would be the odds of getting caught? If I
got caught, what would happen to me? Would I go to Bioethics
jail? Get fined? If I went to jail, who would take care of
This concerns ethical issues pertaining to life,
my children? Therefore, even if my motive (preventing
biomedical researches, medicines, health care, and
my children from starving) was praiseworthy, the act of
medical profession. As such, it deals with controversies
stealing might still be wrong because other actions
like those about surrogate mothering, genetic
might be more cost-effective in bringing about the
manipulation of fetuses, stem cell research, using
desired consequences.
human embryos in research, in-vitro fertilization,
Virtue Ethics abortion, euthanasia, suicide, patient rights,
confidentiality of patients’ records, physicians’
Virtue Ethics, as a moral system, places emphasis responsibilities, and mandatory medical screening.
on developing good habits of character, like kindness
and generosity, and avoiding bad character traits, or Environmental Ethics
vices, such as greed or hatred. Virtue-based theories
It deals with moral issues concerning nature, ecosystem,
give importance to moral education which molds
and its nonhuman contents. This includes issues such as
individuals to habitually act in a virtuous manner.
animal rights, animal experimentation, endangered
Focusing on the character of the agent, virtue ethics
species preservation, pollution control, and sustainable
describes right actions as those chosen and performed
development.
by a suitably virtuous person.
Business Ethics
Virtue ethics is a philosophy developed by Aristotle and
other ancient Greeks. It is the quest to understand and It examines moral principles concerning business
live a life of moral character. environment which involves issues about corporate
practices, policies, business behaviors, and the conducts
This character-based approach to morality assumes
and relationship of individuals in the organizations. It
that we acquire virtue through practice. By practicing
investigates ethical controversies such as those about
being honest, brave, just, generous, and so on, a person
the social responsibility of businesses, employee rights,
develops an honorable and moral character. According
harassment, labor unions, misleading advertising, job
to Aristotle, by honing virtuous habits, people will
discrimination, and whistleblowing.
likely make the right choice when faced with ethical
challenges. Sexual Ethics
3. APPLIED ETHICS It studies moral issues about sexuality and human
sexual behavior. It examines topics like homosexuality,
Applied Ethics philosophically examines specific,
lesbianism, polygamy, premarital sex, marital fidelity,
controversial moral issues. Using philosophical
extra-marital sex, non-marital procreation, loveless
methods, this area of concern in Ethics attempts
sexual relations, safe sex, and contraceptive use.
Social Ethics and logic, and justifying, and if necessary, changing
practices, institutions, and beliefs based on existing or
It deals with what is right for a society to do and how it new existing information.
should act as a whole. Its focus is on what may be
deemed as proper behavior for people as a whole. Actually, reason spells the difference of moral
Some of the issues under this are those about racial judgments from mere expressions of personal
discrimination, death penalty, nuclear weapon preference. If after eating, someone says, "I like a sweet
production, gun control, drug use for fun, and welfare cake," he is not required to support it with good reasons
rights. for that is a statement about his/her personal taste and
nothing more. But in the case of moral judgments, they
Reason and Impartiality as Minimum Requirement for require backing by reasons. In the absence of sensible
Morality rationale, they are merely capricious and ignorable.
REASON AND IMPARTIALITY AS MINIMUM Moral deliberation is a matter of weighing reasons and
REQUIREMENT FOR MORALITY
being guided by them. In understanding the nature of
morality, considering reasons is indispensable. Truth in
One of the reasons Ethical Ethics entails being justified by good reasons. That is,
Subjectivism and Emotivism are not viable theories in the rightful moral decision involves selecting the option
ethics is that they miss to make a distinction between that has the power of reason on its side.
moral judgments and mere expressions of personal
preference. Genuine moral or value judgments ought to Being defined by good reasons, moral truths are
be backed up by pertinent reasons. Moreover, they objective in the sense that they are true no matter what
must possess the quality of impartiality, which means, we might want or think. We cannot make an act moral
among other things that personal feelings or inclinations or immoral just by wishing it to be because we cannot
should be suppressed if necessary.
merely will that the weight of reason be on its side or
against it. This also explains why morality is not
Reason and Impartiality Defined arbitrary. Reason commends what it commends,
Humans have not only feelings but also reason, and regardless of our feelings, attitudes, opinions, and
reason plays a vital role in Ethics. In fact, moral truths desires.
are truths of reason; that is, a moral judgment is true if
it is espoused by better reasons than the alternatives. Since the connection between moral judgments and
reason is necessary and important, then a proposed
If someone tells us that a certain action is immoral, we theory on the nature of moral judgment should be able
may ask why it is so, and if there is no reasonable to give an account for the relation. In focusing on
answer, we may discard the proposition as absurd. Also, attitudes and feelings, both Emotivism and Subjectivism
if somebody utters that a particular act is wrong and fail to accomplish this important thing.
explains that it is because it does not happen to fit his
taste, then we also do not count his claim as a Impartiality, on the other hand, involves the idea that
legitimate ethical judgment. Clearly thus, reason is a
each individuate interests and point of view are equally
necessary requirement for morality. important. Also called evenhandedness or fair-
At least in Philosophy, reason is the basis or motive for mindedness, impartiality is a principle of justice holding
an action, decision, or conviction. As a quality, it refers that decisions ought to be based on objective criteria.
to the capacity for logical, rational, and analytic rather than on the basis of bias, prejudice, or preferring
thought; for consciously making sense of things, the benefit to one person over another for improper
establishing and verifying facts, applying common sense reasons.
Impartiality in morality requires that we give equal 2. Determine the Ethical Issues. The moral issues
and/or adequate consideration to the interests of all should be correctly stated in terms of competing
concerned parties. The principle of impartiality assumes interests. It is these conflicting interests that practically
that every person, generally speaking, is equally make for a moral dilemma. The issues must be
important; that is, no one is seen as intrinsically more presented in a P vs. Q format in order to reflect the
significant than anyone else. interests that are colliding in a specific moral dilemma.
For instance, many ethical decisions, especially at the
Other ethicists however, suggest that some clarification end of a patient's life, can be stated in terms of patient
is required. From the impartial standpoint, to say that
autonomy (or the right of the individual to make his or
no one is seen as intrinsically more significant than her own decisions about medical care) vs. the sanctity
anyone else, is not to say that there is no reason of life (or the duty to preserve life).
whatsoever for which an individual might demand more
moral attention or better treatment than others. Many 3. Identify the Principles that Have a Bearing on
ethicists suppose that from the impartial point of view, the Case. What principles have a bearing on the
properly conceived, some persons count as more case? In any moral dilemma, there are sure
significant, at least in certain ways. A virtuous and moral values or principles that are vital to the
respectable religious leader may be supposed to be rival positions being taken. It is very significant
more significant than a mere maid; so in an emergency to recognize these principles, and in some
(say, a building on fire) the decent religious leader cases, to decide whether some principles are to
ought to be rescued first. The reason, nonetheless, is be weighted more heavily than others. For Rae,
not that the religious leader is intrinsically more biblical principles will be clearly weighted the
significant rather, it is that he makes greater most heavily. But there may be other principles
contributions to society. essentially relevant to the case that may come
from other sources. There may be constitutional
The 7-Step Moral Reasoning Model principles or principles drawn from natural law
THE 7-STEP MORAL REASONING MODEL that supplement the biblical principles that
come into play here.
Contemporary author Scott B. Rae, Ph.D. proposes a 4.
model for making ethical decisions. To say the least, his 4. List the Alternatives. This step involves
suggested 7-step model introduces the use of reason coming up with various alternative courses of
and impartiality in deciding on moral matters. action as part of the creative thinking included
in resolving a moral dilemma. "Though there
The following are the steps or elements of a model for
will be some alternatives which you will rule out
making moral decisions:
without much thought, in general, the more
1. Gather the Facts. Some moral dilemmas can be alternatives that are listed, the better the
resolved just by clarifying the facts of the case in chance that your list will include some high
question. But in more complex cases, gathering the quality ones. In addition, you may come up with
facts is the indispensable first step prior to any ethical some very creative alternatives that you had
analysis and reflection on the case. In examining a case, not considered before" (Rae, n.d.). e. Compare
we want to know the available facts at hand, as well as the Alternatives with the Principles. This step
any facts presently not known but that need to be involves eliminating alternatives according to
determined. We thus have to ask not only "what do we the moral principles that have a bearing on the
know?" but also "what do we need to know?" in order case. In many cases, the case will be resolved at
to generate an intelligent ethical decision. this point, since the principles will remove all
alternatives except one. As a matter of fact, the
purpose of this comparison is to determine
whether there is a clear decision that can be
 made without further deliberation. If a clear punished. If a person is punished, they must have done
decision is not forthcoming, then the next step wrong.
in the model should be considered. Some of the
• Stage 2. Individualism and Exchange. At this stage,
alternatives, at the least, may be rejected by
this step of comparison. children recognize that there is not just one right view
that is handed down by the authorities. Different
individuals have different viewpoints.
5. Weigh the consequences. If the principles do not
produce a clear decision, "then a consideration of the Level 2 - Conventional morality
consequences of the remaining available alternatives is Conventional morality is the second stage of moral
in order. Both positive and negative consequences are development, and is characterized by an acceptance of
to be considered. They should be informally weighted, social rules concerning right and wrong. At the
since some positive consequences are more beneficial conventional level (most adolescents and adults), we
than others and some negative consequences are more begin to internalize the moral standards of valued adult
detrimental than others role models.
6. Make a Decision Since deliberation ought not to go Authority is internalized but not questioned, and
on forever, a decision must be made at some point. It reasoning is based on the norms of the group to which
must be realized that one common element to moral the person belongs.
dilemmas is that there are no easy and painless
solutions to them. Normally, the decision that is made is A social system that stresses the responsibilities of
one that posseses the least number of problems or relationships as well as social order is seen as desirable
negative consequences, not one that is devoid of them. and must, therefore, influence our view of what is right
and wrong.
Lawrence Kohlberg
• Stage 3. Good Interpersonal Relationships. The
Kohlberg identified three distinct levels of moral child/individual is good in order to be seen as being a
reasoning: preconventional, conventional, and good person by others. Therefore, answers relate to the
postconventional. Each level has two sub-stages. approval of others.
Level 1 - Preconventional morality • Stage 4. Maintaining the Social Order. The
Preconventional morality is the first stage of moral child/individual becomes aware of the wider rules of
society, so judgments concern obeying the rules in
development, and lasts until approximately age 9. At
the preconventional level children don’t have a personal order to uphold the law and to avoid guilt.
code of morality, and instead moral decisions are Level 3 - Postconventional morality
shaped by the standards of adults and the
consequences of following or breaking their rules. Postconventional morality is the third stage of moral
development, and is characterized by an individuals’
For example, if an action leads to punishment is must be understanding of universal ethical principles. These are
bad, and if it leads to a reward is must be good. abstract and ill-defined, but might include: the
Authority is outside the individual and children often preservation of life at all costs, and the importance of
make moral decisions based on the physical human dignity.
consequences of actions. Individual judgment is based on self-chosen principles,
• Stage 1. Obedience and Punishment Orientation. The and moral reasoning is based on individual rights and
child/individual is good in order to avoid being justice. According to Kohlberg this level of moral
reasoning is as far as most people get.
Only 10-15% are capable of the kind of abstract thinking upon receiving organ transplants: a heart, lungs, a
necessary for stage 5 or 6 (post-conventional morality). kidney, and a liver. If a healthy person wanders into the
That is to say, most people take their moral views from hospital, his organs could be harvested to save four lives
those around them and only a minority think through at the expense of one life. This would arguably produce
ethical principles for themselves. the greatest good for the greatest number. But few
would consider it an acceptable course of action, let
• Stage 5. Social Contract and Individual Rights. The alone the most ethical one.
child/individual becomes aware that while rules/laws
might exist for the good of the greatest number, there So, although utilitarianism is arguably the most reason-
are times when they will work against the interest of based approach to determining right and wrong, it has
particular individuals. obvious limitations.

The issues are not always clear-cut. For example, in Kant’s ethical theory
Heinz’s dilemma, the protection of life is more
Deontological theory= duty focused to rightg and wrong
important than breaking the law against stealing.

• Stage 6. Universal Principles. People at this stage have Good will

developed their own set of moral guidelines which may 1. Action must conform to the moral law
or may not fit the law. The principles apply to everyone. 2. 2. Agent must right motive. (doing ones duty)
E.g., human rights, justice, and equality. The person will Who was Immanuel Kant?
be prepared to act to defend these principles even if it
means going against the rest of society in the process Immanuel Kant (Prussia, 1724-1804) was one of the
and having to pay the consequences of disapproval and most influential intellectuals in the field of political
or imprisonment. Kohlberg doubted few people philosophy. Today, justice systems in democracies are
reached this stage. fundamentally based on Kant’s writings. The
philosopher’s work provides a compelling account of a
Utilitarianism single set of moral principles that can be used to design
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that determines right just institutions for governing society perfectly. The
from wrong by focusing on outcomes. It is a form of United Nations, formed centuries after Kant’s first book
consequentialism. was published, is largely based on his vision of an
international government that binds nation-states
Utilitarianism holds that the most ethical choice is the together and maintains peace.
one that will produce the greatest good for the greatest
number. It is the only moral framework that can be Categorical Imperatives in Kantian Ethics
used to justify military force or war. It is also the most A hypothetical imperative is a moral obligation
common approach to moral reasoning used in business applicable only in pursuit of a predetermined goal. For
because of the way in which it accounts for costs and example, a student studies to get good grades.
benefits. Hypothetical imperatives are independent of morality.
However, because we cannot predict the future, it’s Kant holds that our moral duties are driven by
difficult to know with certainty whether the categorical imperatives. The rules are categorical as
consequences of our actions will be good or bad. This is they are universally applicable, to every person, in every
situation, regardless of their personal goals and
one of the limitations of utilitarianism.
inhibitions. They are imperative because a human being
Utilitarianism also has trouble accounting for values may be inclined to not adhere to a moral code of
such as justice and individual rights. For example, conduct, as it is only human to seek pleasure and
assume a hospital has four people whose lives depend reduce pain.
Kant derives a test to determine a categorical However, Kant is not a masochist or an anarchist. He
imperative. He says, “Act only in accordance with that understands that for civilization to exist, a student must
maxim through which you can at the same time will that use herself as a means to get good grades and her
it become a universal law.” It means that an idea can be professor as a means to amass knowledge. This is where
only be exposed when applied to everyone. Cheating on he introduces the idea of respect being essential to
a test can only be moral when everyone else’s cheating humanity, which is different from sentiments like love,
on a test is justified. However, in a practical sense, a sympathy, or altruism. Respect doesn’t discriminate like
mass cheating scandal will eradicate trust in the system love. One is human and, therefore, one deserves
of meritocracy, which will lead to a breakdown of respect. Kant called it the Formula for Humanity, and it
educational institutions. remains, by far, his least controversial formulation.

To conclude, cheating on a test is immoral. According to Autonomy and Freedom

Kantian ethics, categorical imperatives are
The Critique of Pure Reason is considered history’s most
counterintuitive in the sense that even though human
beings may be inclined to act in self-interest, their comprehensive account of the determination of free
actions must be driven by their duty to humanity. Kant will. Kant talked about freedom not as a universal law
considered self-improvement and preservation to be an set in concrete, but instead as something of one’s own
undebatable obligation that is placed on everyone. making. That is to say that acting virtuously simply
because one fears a penalty is self-defeating.
Therefore, unproductivity, suicide, or any form of self-
destruction is inherently immoral. Free will goes beyond the pessimistic view of a
Kant’s Definition of Morality “freedom from” external actors and becomes a
“freedom to” autonomously determine and impose
Kant’s moral philosophy is a deontological normative moral requirements. It is similar to Jean Jacques
theory, which is to say he rejects the utilitarian idea that Rousseau’s idea of freedom. When one acts in
the rightness of an action is a function of how fruitful its accordance with her desires or intuition, she is simply
outcome is. He says that the motive (or means), and not acting to satisfy a necessity. This makes one a slave to
consequence (or end), of an action determines its moral impulse, and for Kant, freedom is the opposite of
value. To live ethically, one must never treat another necessity. His notion of freedom is therefore different
human being as a means to some greater end. Human from libertarianism, which preaches one must possess
beings, by virtue of their unique ability to reason, are the freedom to do as she pleases.
different from other forms of physical existence.
Critics argue that autonomy creates a space for
Kant wrote that “without rationality, the universe would subjectivity, as different principles might hold a decisive
be a waste, in vain, and without purpose.” The only way authority over different people. Kant’s response is
to preserve such consciousness, which is unique to the simple – rationality is universal, regardless of one’s
universe or at least the Earth, is by treating all humans personal experiences and circumstances. As long as
as ends in and of themselves. It’s alright to eat food to morality is derived from reason, there should be a fairly
satiate hunger, but stealing is wrong as it deprives the objective sense of what is virtuous and what isn’t.
owner of her private property.
Virtue Ethics Defined
Kant advocates a stringent notion of morality, which
demands that virtue is universal. Stealing is immoral VIRTUE ETHICS
regardless of one’s circumstance. Murder is wrong even Socrates (470 399 BC), Plato (427-348 BC), and Aristotle
in the case of self-defense. It is this objectivity that (384-322 BC) are Greek philosophers In the ancient
remains Kant’s most remarkable yet disputed idea, as it period who deeply affected Western philosophy.
challenges the basis of civilization since Aristotle. Though having political ambitions as a young man, Plato
eventually became a student and disciple of Socrates,
the most admired and patronized Greek philosopher at Socrates and Plato's Moral Philosophy
the time. Aristotle (384-322 BC) is a philosopher and
natural scientist who eventually shared the distinction SOCRATES AND PLATO'S MORAL PHILOSOPHY
of being the most famous of ancient philosophers with Since Plato wrote down and essentially adhered to
Socrates and Plato, his (Aristotle's) teacher, Socrates' philosophy, it is practical for us to treat their
The contemporary theory In Ethics called Virtue Ethics is ethical theories jointly here. In the dialogue Gorgias
said to have started with these three great written by Plato, Socrates indicates that pleasure and
philosophers. In the medieval era, the Italian pain fail to provide an objective standard for
determining moral from immoral since they do not exist
philosopher and theologian Thomas Aquinas (1225-
1274) revived, enhanced, and 'Christianized' the Greek apart from one another, while good and evil do.
Virtue Ethics. In Euthyphro, Socrates asks Euthyphro whether
Virtue Ethics Defined something is good because the gods love it, or whether
the gods love it because it is good. Socrates' point is
Virtue Ethics is a moral philosophy that teaches that an that what is good has a certain independence from the
action is right if it is an action that a virtuous person whims of the gods' determination of the rightness of
would perform In the same situations. According to the our actions and mores. Socrates therefore believed in
theory, a virtuous person is someone who acts the existence of objective ethical standards though he
virtuously and people act virtuously if they possess and admitted that it is not that easy to specify them.
live the virtues. A virtue is a moral characteristic that an
individual needs to live well. Central to Plato's philosophy is his theory of Forms—the
objectively existing immaterial entities that are the
Virtue Ethics outs emphasis on developing good habits proper object of knowledge. Everything in the 'material
of character and avoiding bad character traits or vices. It world is what it is by virtue of its resemblance to, or
focuses on the character of the agent and describes participation in, this universal Form or Idea. These
right actions as those chosen and performed by a unchanging independent forms are like ideal and stable
suitably virtuous person. models of the ordinary observable objects.

Virtue ethicists, such as Aristotle, hold that people live Circularity and squareness are good examples of what
their lives trying to develop their faculties to the fullest Plato meant by Forms. A thing in the physical world may
extent. We have many faculties to develop such as be called a circle or a square insofar as it resembles or
intellectual, physical, social, moral, and so on. participates the Form "circularity" or "squareness."
Developing one's moral capacity to the fullest is {Baird, 2009)
pursuing ethical excellence, which is displayed by the
virtues (hence "virtue ethics"). Now, since everything in the perceptible realm
participates in independent an perfect forms, there is
Basically, the virtues are the freely chosen character also a form even for moral predicates, such as justice an
traits that people praise in others. People praise them happiness. The highest of all forms is the form of the
because: Good. For Plato, those who comprehend the Good will
always do good actions. Bad actions are performed out
(1) they are difficult to develop; of not knowing the Good. To know the Good,
(2) they are corrective of natural deficiencies (for nonetheless, requires an austere and intellectually
instance, industriousness is corrective of one's tendency meticulous way of life.
to be lazy); and Virtue therefore is regarded as knowledge and can be
(3) they are beneficial both to self and society. taught. Knowledge of the Good is considered as the
source of guidance in moral decision making that to
know the good, it is argued, is to do the good.
Virtue Ethics defines a moral person as someone who separate realm of Forms. Aristotle, instead, argues that
develops the virtues and unfailingly displays them over rational beings can discover the 'essences of things and
time. The ancient Greeks list four "cardinal virtues": that a being's essence is its potential fulfillment or 'telos
namely, wisdom, courage, moderation, and justice. The ',(has the essence of an acorn is to become an oak
Christian teaching, on the other hand, recommends tree). The essence ore telos of human being' is
faith, hope, charity, and love. Others suggest virtues rationality and, thus, a life of contemplation is the best
which are associated with 'humanity' namely, grace, kind of life for true human flourishing.
mercy, forgiveness, honor, restraint, reasonableness,
and solidarity.

ARISTOTLE'S ETHICS Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics can be

thus summarized in this manner:
At least two of Aristotle's works specifically concern
morality, the Eudemian Ethics and the Nicomachean All humans seek happiness ("well being"),
but in different ways. True happiness is tied to the
Ethics. But since only a few have studied the former, the
Nicomachean Ethics has been regarded as the Ethics of purpose or end (telos) of human life. The essence [or
Aristotle since the beginning of the Christian era. 'telos'] of human beings (that which separates and
distinguishes them as a species) is Reason. Reason
employed in achieving happiness (human 'telos') leads
Three general descriptions, which are interrelated, can to moral virtues [e.g., courage, temperance, justice and
be used to p depict Aristotle's ethics. First, his ethical prudence] and intellectual virtues (e.g., 'science, art,
system may be termed "self realizationism" - In his practical wisdom, theoretical wisdom)." ("Aristotle,"
philosophy, when someone acts in line with his nature n.d.)
or end ('telos') and thus realizes his full potential, he
does moral and will be happy.
In terms of his ethics, Aristotle thus believes in the
Like Plato's and most of the other ancient philosophers'
ethical theories, Aristotle's view is also of a type known excellence of philosophical contemplation and virtuous
as eudoimonistic. As such, it focuses on happiness actions stemming from virtuous persons. By virtuous
(eudaimonia), or the good for man, and how to obtain actions, he means those which the person with wisdom
it. would choose because what is good is obvious to such a
person.
Finally, his moral philosophy is aretaic, or virtue-based.
Whereas act-oriented ethics is focused mainly on what
we should do, a virtue ethics is interested basically in b. Happiness and Virtues.
what we should be, that is, the character or the sort of
person we should struggle to become. Aristotle believes that the ultimate human goal is self.
realization. This entails achieving one's natural purpose
by functioning or living consistently with human nature.
a. Aristotle's 'Telos'. Accomplishing it, in turn, produces happiness; whereas
inability to realize it leads to sadness, frustration, and
A "telos" is an end or purpose. Aristotle believes that ultimately to poor life. It therefore behooves us to act in
the essence or essential nature of beings, including accordance with our nature so as to be content and
humans, lay not at their cause (or beginning) but at complete. In detail, what does Aristotle mean by human
their end ('telos'). nature?

Aristotle identifies three natures of man: the

Aristotle does not agree with Plato's belief in a (1) vegetable or physical, (2) animal or emotional, and
(3) rational or mental. As previously explained, the In fact, Aristotle fundamentally connects happiness to
thing that distinguishes humans from all other creatures virtues, as he explains happiness in terms of activities
is the rational nature or the ability to reason. Rational manifesting the virtues. Human good, he says, its the
development is thus deemed the most important, as it activity of the soul in accordance with excellence or
is uniquely human. Accordingly, living in accordance virtue. Aristotle's happiness, therefore, is not much of a
with reason is viewed as vital in self-realization or subjective feeling of well-being, but human well-
developing one's potential. being itself, being the human good. Moreover, his
account of eudoimonia is different from hedonist and
utilitarian account of happiness as pleasure.
This self-realization—the awareness of our nature and
the development of our potentials—is the key to human
happiness. But what is this happiness in line with c. Virtue as Habit.
Aristotle's ethical view?
Aristotle's idea of happiness should also be understood
in the sense of human flourishing. This flourishing is
Ethics, for Aristotle, is the inquiry into the human good. attained by the habitual practice of moral and
This is to say that the purpose of studying ethics is to intellectual excellences, or 'virtues'.
make ourselves good, though Aristotle assumes that we
already want to become good. This human good Related to self-realization, acting in line with virtues is
acting in accordance with reason. The function of
is eudaimonia or happiness.
human being, accordingly,. consists in activities which
manifest the best states of his rational aspect, that is
the virtues.
Aristotle observed that wise persons seek an end that is
self-sufficient, final, and attainable over ones life. This Aristotle employs the word 'hexis' to refer to moral
end is happiness which all human beings want. Aristotle virtue. One denotation of the term 'hexis' is an active
also considers happiness as the summum bonum - the state,.condition in which something must actively hold
greatest good of all human life. He adds that it is the itself. Virtue, thus, manifests itself in action. More
only intrinsic good, that is, the good that is pursued for explicitly, an action counts as virtuous, according to
its own sake. While all other things, such as pleasure, Aristotle, when a person holds oneself in a stable
wealth, and honor, are merely means to an end, equilibrium of the soul, in order to select the action
happiness is man's ultimate goal as it is an end in itself. knowingly and for its own sake. This stable equilibrium
of the soul is what constitutes character. Moral virtue,
Compared to Plato's philosophy, it is happiness for Aristotle, is the only practical road to effective
(eudaimonia), not the Form of the Good, which is the action. The virtuous person, who has good character,
supreme good with which Aristotle's ethics is sees truly, judges rightly, and acts morally.
concerned. (Some even claim that Aristotle's ethics is
Plato's moral philosophy minus the Theory of Forms.)
Aristotle indeed holds that the supreme good in ethics d. Virtues and the Golden Mean.
cannot be identified with the Idea of the Good because
ethics is a practical science, whereas the immutable Virtue refers to an excellence of moral or intellectual
character. As mentioned earlier, Aristotle distinguishes
Idea of the Good could only be of theoretical interest.
But agreeing with Plato, Aristotle believes that there is two kinds of virtue: virtues of intellect and moral
an essential connection between living happily and virtues. The first corresponds to the fully rational part of
living virtuously. the soul, the intellect; the second pertains to the part of
the rational soul which can 'obey reason'. Moral virtue
is an expression of character, formed by habits
reflecting repeated choices, hence is also called virtue virtues, he implies that man has to be moral. Additional
of character. moral virtues include generosity, civility,
trustworthiness, reliability, sociability, dependability,
For Aristotle, moral virtues follow from our nature as
honesty, sincerity, gentleness, tolerance, benevolence,
rational beings—they are' the traits or characteristics cooperativeness, empathy, tact, kindness, and good
that enable us to act according to reason. But what is temper. Aristotle nonetheless admits that some actions,
acting according to reason? such as adultery, theft, and murder, do not admit of a
Acting in a reasonable manner is done when we choose mean and are always wrong. We could never excuse
to and indeed act in a way that neither goes to excess anyone for committing just the right amount of
nor defect. Excess and defect normally indicate a vice. murders, nor defend someone for committing adultery
Virtue lies neither in the vice of deficiency nor in the with the right person at the right time in the right way.
vice of excess but in the middle ground. Thus, moral In the same vein, no culture considers envy, spite,
virtue is the. golden mean between the two less dishonesty, insensitivity, cruelty, arrogance, injustice,
desirable extremes. cowardice, self-centeredness, and the like to be virtues.

Happiness and its opposite play a role in the e. 'Phronesis' and Practice. In using the golden mean to
determination of the golden mean, since we tend to do become virtuous, we must recognize not only that the
actions that bring delight and avoid actions that bring mean is neither too much nor too little but also it is
agony. The virtuous person is brought up to find 'relative to us' as moral agents. What constitutes the
enjoyment in virtuous actions and sorrow in vices. right amount of something may differ from person to
another. Aristotle knows that the right amount of food
for a 6-footer basketball player is different from the
Aristotle mentions four basic moral right amount of food for a 3-footer, thin 12-year old
virtues: courage, temperance, justice and prudence. Co boy. In learning to avoid excess and defect, we thus
urage is the golden mean between cowardice have to find out for ourselves what the right amount is
(deficiency) and tactless rashness (excess). The coward in our respective unique case and situation. But what
has too little bravery, the reckless individual has too determines what is appropriate for us in a particular
much, and the courageous shows just the proper circumstance?
amount of bravery.
Temperance is the mean between gluttony (excess) and Aristotle teaches about an intellectual virtue that plays
extreme frugality (deficiency). Both overindulgence and a significant role in Ethics. The phronesis, the
denying oneself of bodily pleasures make one less intellectual virtue of practical wisdom, is that kind of
happy; whereas practicing temperance makes one moral knowledge which guides us to what is
virtuous and fulfilled. This directly exemplifies the appropriate in conjunction with moral virtue.
connection between being happy and being virtuous. This phronesis or practical wisdom is a grasp of the
Justice is the virtue of giving others right what they appropriate way to respond—to feel and act—in a
deserve, neither more nor less. Now, what helps us to particular situation. Once we have learned the proper
know what is just or reasonable in various amount of some kind of action through moral virtue and
circumstances, enabling us to keep away from excess practical wisdom, then, we have 'the right prescription'
and defect is the moral virtue called prudence or (orthos logos). To be virtuous therefore is to act in
wisdom. accordance with the right prescription.

The question why we should be moral was also But acting appropriate to the right prescription should
answered by Aristotle by his doctrine of virtues. By be understood in terms of practice, training,
simply including justice or morality among his list of or cultivation. To be virtuous one must perform the
actions that habitually bring virtue. A person must
practice and develop the virtue of generosity, for
instance, so that acting generously becomes habitual.
Moral education thus comprises imitation (say, parents
and teachers), internalization, and practice until it
becomes normal.

Aristotle's complete picture of a morally virtuous

man therefore is someone who constantly and
habitually acts according to moral virtue and practical
wisdom, ideally exhibiting a lifetime of rational living
and avoidance of vice, thereby forming an ethical
character, achieving self-realization, and thus realizing
happiness and human good. His comprehensive notion
of moral virtue is that it is a state of character
manifested in choice and action, resting in the golden
mean, resolved by the prescription that a wise person
would determine.