MODULE CONTENT

Topic 2: Virtue Ethics

Nominal Duration: 4.5 hours

Learning Outcomes:
Upon completion of this topic, the student must be able to:
1. identify the different concepts in virtue ethics;
2. analyze the various perspectives of virtue ethics;
3. ascribe the appropriate virtues that befit a certain individual; and
4. explain how virtues become values.

Introduction

Virtue Ethics began in ancient Greek philosophy. Socrates was thought to have
facilitated its beginning and was subsequently developed considerably
by Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics. Normative ethical philosophies constitute virtue
ethics which stresses being rather than doing. Morality, in virtue ethics, originates from
the character of the human person, instead of just a reflection of the actions (or
consequences thereof) of the human person.

A virtue is generally agreed to be a character trait, such as a habitual action or

settled sentiment (Carr and Steutel,1999). Virtue (arete in Greek) is a positive trait that
renders a human person good. A virtue is different from feelings, as claimed
by Hursthouse (1999):

A virtue such as honesty or generosity is not just a tendency to do

what is honest or generous, nor is it to be helpfully specified as a
“desirable” or “morally valuable” character trait. It is, indeed a
character trait—that is, a disposition which is well entrenched in its
possessor, something that, as we say “goes all the way down”, unlike
a habit such as being a tea-drinker—but the disposition in question,
far from being a single track disposition to do honest actions, or even
honest actions for certain reasons, is multi-track. It is concerned with
many other actions as well, with emotions and emotional reactions,
choices, values, desires, perceptions, attitudes, interests,
expectations and sensibilities. To possess a virtue is to be a certain
sort of person with a certain complex mindset. (Hence the extreme
recklessness of attributing a virtue on the basis of a single action.)

Virtue ethics addresses the question, “What sort of person must I be to be an

excellent person?” rather than “What is my duty?” Virtues are habitual, excellent traits
that are intentionally developed throughout one’s life.

81
1. Socrates’ Ethics

Socrates, (born c. 470 BCE, Athens [Greece]—died 399 BCE, Athens), Greek
philosopher whose way of life, character, and thought exerted a profound influence on
ancient and modern philosophy.

Socrates was a widely recognized and controversial figure in his native Athens,
so much so that he was frequently mocked in the plays of comic dramatists.
(The Clouds of Aristophanes, produced in 423, is the best-known example.) Although
Socrates himself wrote nothing, he is depicted in conversation in compositions by a
small circle of his admirers—Plato and Xenophon first among them. He is portrayed in
these works as a man of great insight, integrity, self-mastery, and argumentative skill.
The impact of his life was all the greater because of the way in which it ended: at age
70, he was brought to trial on a charge of impiety and sentenced to death by poisoning
(the poison probably being hemlock) by a jury of his fellow citizens.

Plato’s Apology of Socrates purports to be the speech Socrates gave at his trial
in response to the accusations made against him (Greek apologia means “defense”).
Its powerful advocacy of the examined life and its condemnation of
Athenian democracy have made it one of the central documents of Western thought
and culture. (adapted from Kraut,R., 2020)

Though there are no primary texts of the teachings of Socrates, (but with the
recordings of Plato), it is known that Socrates was an avid promoter of moral reasoning
and critical thinking among the citizens of Athens.

Socrates’ Moral Philosophy

Socrates believed the best way for people to live was to focus on the pursuit of
virtue rather than the pursuit, for instance, of material wealth (Brickhouse and Smith,
1990). He always invited others to try to concentrate more on friendships and a sense
of true community, for Socrates felt this was the best way for people to grow together
as a populace (Nichols, 1987). As manifested in his actions, Socrates lived up to his
beliefs. Known for his strength of mind, which was beyond reproach, he accepted his
death sentence when many opined he would clearly run away from Athens, as he
believed he could not escape or oppose the desire of his community.

Socrates concentrated on human behavior and tried to discover what makes a

virtuous life. He thought that a virtuous life is the key to man’s happiness. Virtue and
happiness are inextricably linked, such that it would be impossible to have one without
the other. The soul is the seat of knowledge and virtue.

Virtue is not something to be taught or acquired through education,

but rather it is merely an awakening of the seeds of good deeds that
lay dormant in the mind and heart of a person. Knowing what is in the
mind and heart of a human being is achieved through self-knowledge
(Ramos, 2010).

This knowledge which leads to virtue must be discovered by man if he wants a

virtuous and happy life. Moreover, man must not only know the rules of right living, he

82
must also live them. Socrates concluded that true knowledge means wisdom which,
in turn, means virtue. For him, knowledge is virtue. Knowledge and virtue are the
same thing. To know what is good means to do what is good. This is the connotation
of the Socratic dictum: “Know yourself”.

When he equated virtue and knowledge, Socrates had in mind a

particular conception of virtue. For him, virtue meant fulfilling one’s
function. As a rational being, a person’s function is to behave
rationally. At the same time, every human being has the inescapable
desire for happiness or the well-being of his or her soul (Stumpf,
1999).

In Socrates’s ethical teachings, what is unlikely to escape observation is that

there are specific virtues which fashion a common thread. Socrates believed that the
most important characteristic a person must possess are virtues, foremost of which
are the philosophical or intellectual virtues. Socrates stressed that “the unexamined
life is not worth living [and] ethical virtue is the only thing that matters” (Duignan,
2009).

2. Plato’s Ethics

Plato, (born 428/427 BCE, Athens, Greece - died 348/347, Athens),

ancient Greek philosopher, student of Socrates (c. 470–399 BCE), teacher
of Aristotle (384–322 BCE), and founder of the Academy, best known as the author of
philosophical works of unparalleled influence. He is believed by some people to have
been the most outstanding philosopher to have ever lived.

Building on the demonstration by Socrates that those regarded as experts

in ethical matters did not have the understanding necessary for a good human life,
Plato introduced the idea that their mistakes were due to their not engaging properly
with a class of entities he called forms, chief examples of which were Justice, Beauty,
and Equality. Whereas other thinkers—and Plato himself in certain passages—used
the term without any precise technical force, Plato in the course of his career came to
devote specialized attention to these entities. As he conceived them, they were
accessible not to the senses but to the mind alone, and they were the most
important constituents of reality, underlying the existence of the sensible world and
giving it what intelligibility it has. In metaphysics Plato envisioned a systematic, rational
treatment of the forms and their interrelations, starting with the most fundamental
among them (the Good, or the One); in ethics and moral psychology he developed the
view that the good life requires not just a certain kind of knowledge (as Socrates had
suggested) but also habituation to healthy emotional responses and therefore
harmony between the three parts of the soul (according to Plato, reason, spirit, and
appetite). His works also contain discussions in aesthetics, political
philosophy, theology, cosmology, epistemology, and the philosophy of language. His
school fostered research not just in philosophy narrowly conceived but in a wide range
of endeavors that today would be called mathematical or scientific. (adapted from
Meinwald, C.C., 2020)

Plato’s reasoning was based on his belief that there are two realms of reality:
first is the realm of Forms and the second realm is the world of Appearances.

83
Plato’s Moral Philosophy

Plato believed that the realm of Forms contains the essence of concepts and
objects, and even the essence of object’s properties. He considered the world of
Forms to be the real world, though humans do not live in that world.

Central to Plato’s philosophy is his Theory of Forms which states that there are
two distinct levels of reality which exist: the visible world (or the world of the senses)
and the intelligible world of Forms (or the abstract world of thought) that stands above
the visible world and gives it being. For example, we are able to identify a courageous
person because we have a general conception of Courage itself, and we are able to
identify the courage in a person only because we have this conception of Courage in
the abstract. In other words, the courageous people we observe are courageous only
because they participate in the more general Form of Courage. This Form of Courage
is itself invisible, eternal, and unchanging, unlike courageous people in the visible
world who grow old and lose their courage when they die.

The Theory of Forms envisions an entire world of such Forms, a

world that exists outside of time and space, where Beauty, Justice,
Courage, Temperance, and the like exist untarnished by the changes and
imperfections of the visible world (Plato, n.d.)

Plato also believed that there is a form for morality. He considered it as the
highest of all forms which he termed as the Form of Good. This Form of Good is a
single Form by virtue of which all good things are good. For him, those who grasp the
nature of the Good will always perform good actions while bad actions are results of
not understanding the true meaning of the Good. For man to be good it is his
responsibility to take care of himself by bringing back the rulership of reason. To
become good or virtuous, he must always follow the lead of reason, with passions and
appetites on a tight leash.

The peculiar function of the rational part of man is to seek the true goal of
human life, and it does this by evaluating things according to their true
nature. Although the passions or appetites might lead us into a world of
fantasy and deceive us into believing that certain kinds of pleasures will
bring us happiness, it is the unique role of reason to penetrate the world of
fantasy, to discover the true world and thereby direct the passions to objects
of love that are capable of producing true pleasure and true happiness
(Stumpf, 1999).

Plato maintained that the intellect should be sovereign, the will second, and
the emotions subject to intellect and will. The just person, whose life is ordered in
this way, is therefore the good person.

3. Aristotle’s Ethics

Aristotle was known to be Plato’s pupil. He regarded happiness as the goal of

human existence. Aristotle, born 384 BCE, Stagira, Chalcidice, Greece – died
322, Chalcis, Euboea), ancient Greek philosopher and scientist, one of the

84
greatest intellectual figures of Western history. He was the author of a philosophical
and scientific system that became the framework and vehicle for both
Christian Scholasticism and medieval Islamic philosophy. Even after the intellectual
revolutions of the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Enlightenment, Aristotelian
concepts remained embedded in Western thinking. (Adapted from Amadio, A. and
Kenny, A., n.d.)

Aristotle’s Moral Philosophy

For Aristotle, moral virtues are habits of action that conform to the golden mean,
the principle of moderation, and they must be flexible because of differences among
people and conditioning factors.

Aristotle’s great contribution to ethics can be sourced from three different

versions of his moral philosophy: the less well known Eudemian Ethics (Ethica
Eudemia), Nicomachean Ethics (Ethika Nikomacheia) his best-known work on ethics,
and Great Ethics (Magna Moralia ). The first two works were said to be his notes for
lecturing, and the third was presumably the notes of his lectures made by one of his
students. The Nicomachean ethics was generally regarded by scholars as the Ethics
of Aristotle. The Eudemian ethics and Great Ethics have never been studied by more
than a handful of scholars.

a. Telos

Aristotle believed that everything has a telos (Greek term for end, purpose, or
goal) In his teleological view, he raised the question to what end, purpose or goal do
different things aim constantly. The philosopher went as far as saying that telos can
encompass all forms of human activity (Baggini, 2016). Aristotle explained that
the telos of the blacksmith is the production of a sword, while that of the swordsman's,
which uses the weapon as a tool, is to kill or incapacitate an enemy (Grayling,
2019). On the other hand, the telos of these occupations are merely part of the
purpose of a ruler, who must oversee the direction and well-being of a state (Grayling,
2019). This maybe further illustrated in the way one can say that the telos of education
is man’s development; the telos of work is the nourishment and fulfillment of
humankind; and the telos of acts of human sexuality in marriage is twofold: procreation
and the expression of mutual love and enrichment of the couple. Within this
teleological view, there are telos that are subordinate to other telos since all activities
have their own particular ends. For Aristotle, these subordinate telos can become the
means to achieve more fundamental telos (Baggini, 2016).

In arranging things in classes, Aristotle categorized men as “rational animals,”

which signifies that their end, purpose or goal is rational. To put it simply, our
responsibility is to bring into reality our full potential as rational animals. If we are not
fully rational, we are distancing ourselves from our authentic essence.

This teleological view gives Aristotle’s Ethics a clear sense of

direction. Our goal in life is to achieve our true nature, and this true
nature consists essentially of rationality. The purpose of a moral
education, then, is to teach us how we may become perfectly rational

85
 and immune to the temptations of our lower animalistic parts.
(Nicomachean Ethics, n.d.)

b. Eudaimonia and arete

When Aristotle raised his question, “what is the ultimate purpose of human
existence? He believed that an important goal should be to pursue “that which is
always desirable in itself and never for the sake of something else” (Pursuit of
Happiness, 2018). Aristotle thought that everything has a purpose and, according to
that purpose, man must decide whether things are good or bad. He thought that the
ultimate end and purpose of mankind is Eudaimonia. Eudaimonia is often translated
as happiness, however it was also understood as welfare, flourishing, or well-being.
Eudaimonia is believed to be attained through the exercise of virtue, practical wisdom,
and rationality. Aristotle claimed that it is innate in man to seek happiness. The nature
and purpose of human action tend towards happiness, which Aristotle termed as
eudaimonia (Soccio, 2007).

Aristotle argued that what distinguishes man from animal is his rationality. He
asserted that pleasure alone cannot result in happiness because animals are driven
by the pursuit of pleasure and according to Aristotle man has greater capacities than
animals (Pursuit of Happiness, 2018). Aristotle’s theorized: the function of man is to
live a certain kind of life, and this activity implies a rational principle, and the function
of a good man is the good and noble performance of these, and if any action is well
performed it is performed in accord with the appropriate excellence: if this is the case,
then happiness turns out to be an activity of the soul in accordance with virtue
(Aristotle, 2004). For him, happiness is not pleasure, nor is it virtue, rather it is the
exercise of virtue (Pursuit of Happiness, 2018).

The idea of virtue (arête) is of paramount importance to Aristotle’s philosophy

of happiness. Arete fundamentally means "excellence" of any kind but is also
understood as "moral virtue”. It is tied to the idea of man living up to his full potential.
It expresses a conscious striving towards being the best one can be. Man is excellent
when he demonstrates his unique telos or purpose. Since rationality is man’s unique,
defining quality, he manifests arete (excellence) if he correctly uses his reason,
principally in relation with moral choice. Man’s happiness is the perfection of his
essence. His happiness is contingent on the exercise of his reason. The exercise of
man’s rationality is the supreme good.

Aristotle maintained that in aiming for happiness, the most essential element is
to have a complete virtue or good moral character (Pursuit of Happiness, 2008).
Happiness involves, through the course of an entire life, choosing the ‘greater good’
not necessarily that which brings immediate, short term pleasure (Pursuit of
Happiness, 2008). Every human act must always aim at its proper end. Pleasure,
though it has value cannot be considered as the ultimate end or good for which every
man must aim. Happiness is not void of pleasures, however, pleasures are an intrinsic
effect, not the appropriate aim. Since pleasure is linked to the irrational part of the soul,
happiness should not be associated with pleasure. Pleasure, wealth, honor, fame and
success are not the goals of life because these would not lead man to eudaimonia (the
highest or fullest happiness). The highest and fullest happiness, according to Aristotle,
comes from a life of reason and contemplation-not a life of inactivity or imbalance but

86
a rationally ordered life in which intellectual, physical, and social needs are all met
under the governance of reason and moderation (Soccio, 2007). Happiness cannot be
achieved until the end of one's life, hence it is a goal and not a temporary state. (Pursuit
of Happiness, 2008).

Man develops virtue or good moral character through habit and practice rather
than through instruction and reasoning. By practicing generosity, justice, friendship,
honesty, courage, justice, patience, temperance, modesty and other virtues man
acquires an honorable and moral character. If man continuously and consistently
hones virtuous habits, he will be able to make the right choice when faced with moral
challenges.

To achieve a virtuous life in the best manner, man must live with the polis (city)
or society which Aristotle called a political association. Every man needs a social life.
No man would choose to live without others because by nature man is social animal
destined to live with others. The goodness or badness of all human acts depends on
its effect on others.

c. The Golden Mean

Aristotle differentiated intellectual virtues from moral virtues. The former are
exercised in the process of thinking while the latter are exercised through action. He
thought that a moral virtue as a character trait should be practiced habitually. A person
who is gentle should be constantly gentle, not just gentle occasionally. For a moral
virtue to be deeply-rooted in one’s personality one must keep on exercising it so it
becomes habitual. It must be performed without fail or without any doubt or hesitation.
Hence, to become genuinely gentle one must keep doing gentleness until gentleness
comes naturally and effortlessly and becomes one’s second nature.

Aristotle believed that every moral virtue is a mean which rests between two
extremes states. The golden mean or golden middle way is the desirable middle
between two extremes, one of excess and the other of deficiency (Aristotle,
2004). Moral goodness means a balance between these two extreme vices. However,
moral virtue does not lie exactly at the center of two vices. According to Aristotle, any
action that is done or indulged excessively or insufficiently would go out of bounds and
would become unreasonable and improper to the nature of the human being (Reyes,
1989). The golden mean is some sort of sliding scale or yardstick for deciding what is
virtuous. It is concerned with development of good character. Virtue is achieved and
preserved by avoiding these two extremes. A person should choose what lies between
the two much and the not enough. Every human act that comes from the golden middle
way should be ruled by reason, which commands the desires and passion into a
balanced whole.

Each moral virtue is a kind of moderation as it is directed toward a moderate

amount or the mean between two corresponding vices, one of excess and one of
deficiency. In his Nicomachean Ethics, he presented some moral virtues:

87
 Excess (vice) Mean (virtue) Deficiency (vice)
Rashness Courage Cowardice
Licentiousness Temperance Insensibility
Prodigality Liberality Illiberality
Vulgarity Magnificence Pettiness
Vanity Magnanimity Pusillanimity
Ambition Proper ambition Unambitiousness
Irascibility Patience Lack of spirit
Boastfulness Truthfulness Understatement
Buffoonery Wittiness Boorishness
Flattery Friendliness Cantankerousness
Shyness Modesty Shamelessness
Envy Righteous indignation Malicious enjoyment

The table of virtues above shows only an approximation and applies differently
to different people. It is not designed as a set of exact rules. Aristotle believed that a
genuinely virtuous person will have no need of rules because he will consistently act
properly.

For Aristotle, virtue is an all-or-nothing affair. We cannot pick and

choose our virtues: we cannot decide that we will be courageous and
temperate but choose not to be magnificent. Nor can we call people
properly virtuous if they fail to exhibit all of the virtues. Though Aristotle
lists a number of virtues, he sees them all as coming from the same
source. A virtuous person is someone who is naturally disposed to
exhibit all the virtues, and a naturally virtuous disposition exhibits all
the virtues equally (Pedemonte, 2014).

Aristotle’s golden mean was not intended as a one-size-fits-all method. The

middle way that he advised people to follow is relative. Since it is subjective, what he
considered was the mean that is good for a particular person. There is no universal
mean or middle way that is applicable to every situation and to every single person.
The golden mean or golden middle way is meant to assist a person in living a virtuous
life. It requires a long moral training. Moreover, it must be noted that not every action
has a middle way. Adultery, spite, envy and such are bad, whether they are done a
little or much, just as temperance and courage are forever good (Aristotle, 2004).

It is indeed challenging to attain the mean but Aristotle admonished those who
are trying hard to achieve it: What is necessary first in aiming at the mean is to avoid
that extreme which is the more opposed to the mean. Since of the two extremes one
is a more serious error than the other, and since hitting the mean accurately is hard,
the second-best thing… is to take the lesser of the evils (Aristotle, 2004).

d. Phronesis

Aristotle believed that to be virtuous one must find the mean of a virtue, i.e., the
desirable middle between two extremes, one of excess and the other of deficiency.
Achieving this balance is arduous. To assist a person in his search for the mean he
must determine the proper path in a certain situation, and according to Aristotle this

88
requires phronesis. The Greek term phronesis is commonly translated as prudence or
practical wisdom.

Phronesis is an intellectual virtue rather than a moral virtue because

we learn it through instruction and not practice, but it is very closely
connected to the moral virtues. Without phronesis, it would be
impossible to practice the moral virtues properly. A person who has
all the right moral virtues knows what ends to pursue, but
without phronesis, that person will not know how to set about pursuing
the right ends. Contrary to modern assumptions, Aristotle is telling us
that having one’s heart in the right place is not good enough: being a
good person requires a kind of practical intelligence as well as a good
disposition. (Nicomachean Ethics, n.d.)

Phronesis guides man in his deliberate moral choice in order to act rightly. It is
of central importance in the formation of virtuous character and in living a good life.
Phronesis is not achieved through formal education or training. It is not intellectual
value gained by finishing a degree in a school rather it is a moral and intellectual virtue
rooted innately in man. Phronesis or the natural ability to form sound judgments and
decisions throughout life can be acquired by anybody even without educational
background. It is obtained and developed through social interaction and real life
experiences. The ability to determine what is worth doing requires constant
practice. For Aristotle, “the end of a practice is some ethically worthwhile good that is
internal to, and inseparable from, the practice and only exists in the practice itself”
(Carr, 2005). Practical wisdom can be acquired through experience. Practical wisdom
can be likened to a skill like cooking. One can’t just read a cookbook expect to become
a master cook or a chef. One actually has to get into a kitchen and start working with
different ingredients to make a particular dish. So it is with practical wisdom. One
becomes more and more practically wise the more decisions one makes. Knowledge
of the wise things to do is not adequate, one must actually do it to become adept at it
through experience.

According to Aristotle, practical reasoning is not a methodological, rule-

governed skill that can first be taught in theory and then applied in practice (Carr,
2005). It evolves through self-understanding honed by correct reasoning and
experience. Phronesis as practical wisdom guides a person to learn and determine
the good to be desired and evil to be avoided in order to behave rightly in society.
Bradshaw (2009) thought that practical wisdom is the ability to do the right thing, at
the right time, for the right reason. Phronesis requires the power to rationally and
carefully think of actions which results into desired effects.

A person acquires phronesis as he advances to maturity and moves away from

rules and subsequently permits him to adjust to a more autonomous, person-centered
and virtue-centered morality. Phronesis is the path to true happiness and excellence.

4. St. Thomas Aquinas’ Ethics

St. Thomas Aquinas, Italian San Tommaso d’Aquino, also called Aquinas,
byname Doctor Angelicus (Latin: “Angelic Doctor”), (born 1224/25, Roccasecca, near
Aquino, Terra di Lavoro, Kingdom of Sicily [Italy]—died March 7, 1274, Fossanova,

89
near Terracina, Latium, Papal States; canonized July 18, 1323; feast day January 28,
formerly March 7), Italian Dominican theologian, the foremost medieval Scholastic. He
developed his own conclusions from Aristotelian premises, notably in
the metaphysics of personality, creation, and Providence. As a theologian, he was
responsible in his two masterpieces, the Summa theologiae and the Summa contra
gentiles, for the classical systematization of Latin theology, and, as a poet, he wrote
some of the most gravely beautiful eucharistic hymns in the church’s liturgy. His
doctrinal system and the explanations and developments made by his followers are
known as Thomism. Although many modern Roman Catholic theologians do not find
St. Thomas altogether congenial, he is nevertheless recognized by the Roman
Catholic Church as its foremost Western philosopher and theologian. (adapted from
Chenu.M.D. (2019)

Aquinas’ Moral Philosophy

a. Law

St. Thomas Aquinas’ typology of laws is of paramount importance to his moral

philosophy. He defined law as an ordinance of reason for the common good,
promulgated by the one who is in charge of the community” (ST, I-II, q. 90, a. 4). Law
is considered an ordinance of reason because it is in accordance with reason or logic
and not entirely in the will of the lawgiver. It is for the common good for the reason that
the purpose of law is the benefit of the community it binds, and not only the welfare of
the legislator or members of a legislative body. It is promulgated in order that the law
can be clearly recognized by or familiar to all people. It is enacted by the one who is
in charge of the community and not on the basis of random choice or personal whim
by just anybody.

Aquinas proposed four kinds of law: eternal, natural, human, and divine.

Eternal law is described as nothing else than the type of Divine Wisdom, as
directing all actions and movements (ST, I-II, q. 93, a. 1). It is God's plan for everyone
and everything in the world. It is God’s will, not entirely understood by men. Eternal
law is God’s governance of the universe as its supreme ruler. All created creatures
are subject to this eternal law which directs them to their appointed end.

Natural law is the rational creature’s participation in the eternal law (ST I-II, q.
91, a. 2.). It is the sharing in the Eternal Law by intelligent creatures. The first principle
of the natural law is good is to be done and pursued, and evil avoided (ST I-II, q. 94,
a. 2.). Guided by reason, all men are bound to live their rational nature. Through choice
and reason man participates in the eternal law for his direction and preservation. The
natural law is universal since it includes all men of every period of time.

Human law is commonly interpreted as positive laws which are enacted and
enforced in human societies. Aquinas argued that human laws are only valid if they
conform to natural law. If a law is unjust, then it is not actually a law, but a perversion
of law (ST, I-II, q. 95, a.2). For a human law to be a true law it must always be directed
to the common good. Human law is an application of natural law and cannot depart
from the essence of the natural law. Since natural law is too wide to present clearly

90
defined rules, the human law’s accurate rules of behavior are generally assumed to
spell out what the natural law instructs.

Divine law is God’s law as divulged in the scripture. It is shared to men through
revelation which is derived from eternal law. This biblical law which contains divine
commands is organized into two parts: Mosaic Law (Old Testament) and New Law
(New Testament). They exhort moral conduct and promise heavenly reward.

In the hierarchy of law, Aquinas believed that human laws originated from
natural law which is a rational participation of man in the eternal law. For this reason,
eternal law is the highest, followed by natural law, and then human law.

Of the four kinds of law, natural law is of prime importance in Ethics. Natural
law is God’s imprint on human beings. Through the light of reason embedded by God
in every man, he is directed to acts and goals appropriate to him. Among created
beings, human beings alone possess the natural tendency to use reason to lead their
lives. The natural law strongly urges men to pursue and do what is good and to avoid
evil. Reason discloses particular natural laws that are good for men such as self-
preservation, procreation, education of children, the desire to know God, and the
pursuit of peaceful life in society. Reason also illuminates the minds of men to
comprehend things that are evil such as murder, adultery, theft, suicide, racism,
bullying, and lying.

b. Elements of Moral Act

Aquinas analyzed human acts on the basis not only of their agreement to the
natural law but also of their elements. He proposed three elements which combine to
constitute the morality of any human act: the object, the end and the circumstances. If
any one of these elements is immoral, the entire human act is rendered immoral. For
a human act to be considered moral, all three elements must be either morally good
or at least morally neutral. If even one of the three elements is morally bad, then the
whole human act is deemed immoral.

Simply put, the object of a human act, is “what the exterior action is about,”
according to Aquinas (ST, I-II, q. 18, a. 6). The object of the human act is what one
would see if he were to witness the act itself. It is the action done or the act itself. One
cannot perform an act if one is not doing anything. The action done is the object of the
act; say, of studying, exercising, drinking, etc. The object of a human act may be
regarded as containing a further specification -e. g., studying in the library for the final
examination, exercising in the gym to stay in shape, drinking clean water. A human
act thus specified may, when considered in itself, be good, bad, or indifferent; thus, to
study in the library for the final examination is good in itself, to kill oneself is bad in
itself, and to eat fruit is in itself an indifferent act.

For a human act to be treated as good, its object, whether viewed in itself or as
further specified, must be free from all defect or at least indifferent. In some human
acts, the object alone is sufficient to conclude whether the human act is morally evil or
not but insufficient in other human acts, hence, the end or intention must also be
evaluated.

91
 The end of a human act is what a person had in mind when he performed an
act. It indicates the intention or purpose of the person executing an act. This intention
or purpose can cause a morally good act either good or evil, and can cause a morally
neutral act either good or evil. A good end can never make a human act good if its
object is evil. If the object is evil, even if done with the best of intentions, one cannot
transform the human act into good.

Stealing from wealthy individuals (object is evil) in order to improve the life of
the poor (good end) a la Robin Hood is still stealing. Turning to abortion (object is evil)
in order to reduce the number of births, to steer clear of unwanted children, and to
properly bring up children (intentions are good) is still abortion. A good end or purpose
cannot make a morally bad act good. No one is permitted to do evil for a good intention.

The circumstances of a human act refer to the different particular characteristics

that encompassed the act. Described in basic terms, the circumstances are the
context in which the human act is performed. The circumstances are such things as
who, what, where, how, when, and with whose help, are needed in determining the
morality of an individual act.

Circumstances increase or decrease the moral goodness or badness of human

acts. A person’s responsibility is increased or decreased by the circumstances. They
can make an evil act less severe by making it more acceptable or less evil, or they can
make an act worse. For example, the consequences of cheating are aggravated or
mitigated depending on who copied, what was copied, where did it happen, how was
it copied, when was it copied, and with whose help was it done. However, they do not
lessen the moral quality of human acts. Circumstances do not make an evil human act
good or right. Murder is morally wrong regardless of the circumstances.

Contrariwise, circumstances can make a good human act, evil. Circumstances

can increase one’s guilt (e.g. when a teacher cheats his students) or decrease one’s
guilt (e.g. when a student tells a white lie to save his classmate from being expelled).

c. Happiness and virtues

Aquinas argued that every human act is directed towards ends. He claimed that
man’s final end is happiness. Every man seeks happiness and is naturally bound to
it. Hence, he is not free to choose or reject it. However, not every man concur as to
whether or where it is achieved. Aquinas thought that man's true happiness does not
consist of wealth, bodily pleasures, fame, honor or in any created worldly good. Man
will be unable to find the greatest happiness in this life, because final happiness
consists in a supernatural union with God (ST, I-II, q. 2, a. 8). The final object of man's
will can only be realized in God, who is the origin of all good. No other good on earth
can completely satisfy man with the ultimate good he seeks.

If, therefore, we speak of man's last end as of the thing which is the
end, thus all other things concur in man's last end, since God is the
last end of man and of all other things. If, however, we speak of man's
last end, as of the acquisition of the end, then irrational creatures do
not concur with man in this end. For man and other rational creatures
attain to their last end by knowing and loving God: this is not possible

92
 to other creatures, which acquire their last end, in so far as they share
in the Divine likeness, inasmuch as they are, or live, or even know
(ST, I-II, q. 1, a. 8).

In the present life an imperfect happiness can be attained by man by living a

life according to reason. Aquinas held that perfect happiness could only be achieved
through a vision of God. This is possible because God has infused in man the longing
to know Him. Man has to purify his soul in order to get a perfect knowledge of God.
When man reaches this, every sadness or worry will be replaced by a pure and
everlasting happiness.

Aquinas declared that happiness is called man's supreme good, because it is

the attainment or enjoyment of the supreme good. (ST, I-II, q. 3, a. 1). He believed
that happiness is attained by cultivating virtues which enable man to comprehend the
essence of happiness and inspire man to seek it. Aquinas defined virtue as a good
habit, which is a good quality of a person demonstrated by his actions and reactions
over a substantial period of time (Porter, 1994). Habit is a quality that inclines man to
act in a particular manner. It can be good or evil. Its moral quality can be decided by
whether the mode is suitable to the things nature (ST, I-II, q. 49, a. 2). It is good habit
if it conforms with man’s nature otherwise, it is bad habit. It is in conformity with man’s
nature if it does not go against the development of man.

Aquinas distinguished acquired habits from infused habits. The acquired habits
are cultivated by man through his own powers repeatedly, deliberately and
consistently in spite of obstacles. Infused habits are directly acquired from God. Man
needs acquired habits to direct him to his natural end and lead him to the good as
defined by human reason. However, he is unable to reach his supernatural end
through his natural abilities alone. Man must receive the infused virtues from God to
attain his supernatural and ultimate end which is his supernatural union with God.

Aquinas introduced at least two types of infused virtues: moral and theological.
Aquinas employed Aristotle’s definition of moral virtue as a habit of choosing the mean
appointed by reason as a prudent man would appoint it (ST, I-II, q. 59, a. 1). Defined
by reason, moral virtue is able to direct man’s appetite so that it seeks and chooses
only what is good. There are four moral (also called cardinal) virtues: prudence, justice,
temperance, and fortitude. Below is a short description of the four Aquinian moral
virtues.

 Prudence is the virtue that disposes practical reason to discern our

true good in every circumstance and to choose the right means of
achieving it.
 Justice is the moral virtue that consists in the constant and firm will
to give their due to God and neighbor
 Temperance is the moral virtue that moderates the attraction of
pleasures and provides balance in the use of created goods.
 Fortitude is the moral virtue that ensures firmness in difficulties and
constancy in the pursuit of the good.
(Catechism of the Catholic Church: Article 7: The Virtues, n.d.)

93
 According to Aquinas virtues are called theological because they have God for
their object, both in so far as by them we are properly directed to Him, and because
they are infused into our souls by God alone, as also, finally, because we come to
know of them only by Divine revelation in the Sacred Scriptures (Delany, 1910).
Through God’s sanctifying grace, man receives the theological virtues directly from
Him. These virtues are faith, hope, and charity which ordain every man to God who is
his ultimate and supernatural end. They originate from God, otherwise these virtues
would fall short of the supernatural end.

The theological virtues permit man to take part in God’s divine life. They
establish the foundation for man’s moral life because they lead, direct, and provide life
to all other virtues. They are offered to man by God and it is up to him to determine
whether or not he wants to receive and apply them in his life. What follows are brief
definitions of the three theological virtues:

 Faith is the infused virtue, by which the intellect, by a movement of the

will, assents to the supernatural truths of Revelation, not on the motive
of intrinsic evidence, but on the sole ground of the infallible authority
of God revealing (Waldron,1912).

 Hope is defined as a Divinely infused virtue, acts upon the will, by

which one trusts, with confidence grounded on the Divine assistance,
to attain life everlasting (Waldron,1912).

 Charity is a divinely infused virtue, inclining the human will to cherish

God for his own sake above all things, and man for the sake of God
(Waldron,1912).

94
Teaching and Learning Activities

Activity

Direction: What do you think is the most important virtue the following individuals must
develop and exercise? (20 points)

Individual Virtue Reason

1. Student
2. Police Officer
3. Farmer
4. Politician
5. Teacher
6. Counselor
7. Entrepreneur
8. Janitor
9. Doctor
10. Parent
11. Electrician
12. Driver
13. Designer
14. Actor/Actress
15. Son/Daughter

95
Assessment Task
Exercise 1

Name: _____________________ Course & Year: _______________

A. Matching Type Test: Match column A with the correct answer on column B,
write only the letter of answer on the space provided.
Column A Column B
1. __________ virtuous life a. world of the senses

2. __________ phronesis b. abstract world of thought

3. __________ visible world c. Form of Good

4. __________ soul d. end, purpose, or goal

5. __________ arete e. Socratic dictum

6. __________ form for morality f. key to man’s happiness

7. __________ telos g. flourishing or well-being

8. __________ “Know yourself”. h. prudence

9. __________ intelligible world of Forms i. excellence

10. __________ Eudaimonia j. seat of knowledge & virtue

B. Modified True or False: Analyze the truth and falsity of the following statements.
Write true if the statement is correct. If false, encircle the word that renders it
wrong and supply the correct answer in the space provided.

_________________ 1. Aquinas’ defined law as an ordinance of reason for

the common good, promulgated by the one who is in
charge of the community
_________________ 2. Human law is the rational creature’s participation in
the eternal law
_________________ 3. Eternal law is God’s law as divulged in the scriptures

_________________ 4. The object of a human act, is “what the exterior

action is about,” according to Aquinas
_________________ 5. The end of a human act indicates the intention or
purpose of the person executing an act.
_________________ 6. The circumstances of a human act refer to the
different particular characteristics that encompassed
the act
_________________ 7. Man needs infused habits to direct him to his natural
end and lead him to the good as defined by human
reason.

96
 _________________ 8. Man must receive the acquired virtues from God to
attain his supernatural and ultimate end which is his
supernatural union with God.
_________________ 9. Moral virtue is a habit of choosing the mean
appointed by will as a prudent man would appoint it
_________________ 10. Theological virtues have God for their object, both in
so far as by them we are properly directed to Him,
and because they are infused into our souls by God
alone

C. Essay: (15 points each item)

1. Does it follow that when one knows what is right he also does what is right?

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________
2. Is Aristotle’s golden mean a one-size-fits-all method?

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

97
Learning Resources
De Guzman, Jens Micah, et al. (2018). Ethics: principles of ethical behavior in
modern society. Philippines: MUTYA Publishing House, Inc.
Gensler, Harry J. (1998). Ethics: A Contemporary Introduction. New York:
Routledge.
Rachel, James and Stuart Rachels. (2018). Elements of moral philosophy, 9th
ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Ramos, Christine (2010). Introduction to philosophy. 2nd ed. Manila: Rex
Bookstore Inc.
Babor, Eddie (2000). Ethics: the philosophical discipline of action. Manila: Rex
Book Store.
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://www.iep.utm.edu/
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/

98