Aristotle Virtue Analysis

I will attempt to give an exposition of the main elements of Aristotle’s view of virtue, and will demonstrate how Aristotle's doctrine of the mean marks the distinction between different states of

Virtue ethics also referred to, as “ethics of character” by Harris is a guiding hand when discussing engineering ethics [1]. The acts of engineering ethics establish a set of obligations to be upheld by each engineer. In the general sense, this embodies the “prevention of unethical conduct”, along with promoting the safety and well being of mankind [1]. But how exactly does one measure what is to be considered “unethical” or “moral” when situations can be held under several different circumstances? This is the vital role of virtue ethics that will be explained further by taking a closer look at Charles E. Harris’ article, “The Good Engineer” and its relevance to Aristotle’s virtue ethics.

Aristotle’s Nicomahean Ethics is a rich text of ancient wisdom, much of which has become ingrained into today’s rhetoric in many schools of thought in the western world. It is with Aristotle’s views on Virtue that this paper is primarily concerned, more specifically with his idea that to have virtue is to display attitudes and actions to a moderate and intermediate degree. Stan Van Hooft (2008) notes that, although Aristotle’s thoughts on this matter are logically sound for the most part, that his assertion that Virtue is the Mean was not his final, conclusive stance on the issue, and that this theory “is only a part of a bigger picture of virtue that he is

Virtue is the conformation of one's life and conduct to moral and ethical principles. Virtue is a trait that many people would see as good. This word means many different things to many different people as described in this paper. I will be describing The Sophists, Socrates, and my own view on virtue and what it is means in all of our minds.

Ethics is the philosophical study of moral judgements (Solomon: 2010). Moral philosophy has long been dominated by two basic theories; deontology, inspired by Immanuel Kant, the eighteenth century philosopher and; utilitarianism or consequentialism, which derives its modern day instructions from eighteenth and nineteenth century philosophers Jeremey Bentham and J. S. Mills, respectively (Hursthouse:1999). Increasing dissatisfaction with these theories and their variants has led in recent years to the emergence of a different theory, the theory of virtue ethics (Statman: 1997). It can be argued that, of the ethical stances considered over the course of this subject, Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics as defined in his Nicomachean Ethics, is the most comprehensive. Unlike the other theories presented, which focus on principles or rules of action as the basis for morality, Aristotle presents us with a classic formulation, an alternative basis for ethical reasoning (Baker: 2013). In virtue ethics, the emphasis is on cultivating a virtuous character rather than following rules of action; that is, with philosophical consideration, it is decided which virtues would, in combination, comprise a fully developed excellent character, and how those virtues contribute to each other and to our overall character (Athanassoulis:2012). It is also known as the ethics of self-realisation (Solomon:2010).

That is, under the Aristotelian philosophy, all human actions have a root cause or motivation.

I will assert that virtue is the happy, magnificent, and content median between the two vices. This type of happiness is our highest objective in life. Moreover, all human activities aim at some end that we consider good. According to Aristotle, virtue is a disposition to behave in the right manner and as a mean between extremes of deficiency and excess, which are called vices. Individuals learn moral virtue primarily through habit and practice. Moreover, Aristotle does not say that we should aim for happiness, but rather that we do aim at happiness. Most individuals think of “happiness” as physical pleasure or honor, but this is because they have an imperfect view of the good life.

In order to understand Aristotle’s virtue ethics, the words eudaimonia and arête must be acknowledged. Eudaimonia is defined as happiness or flourishing. This state of eudaimonia is achieved by striving for goals in life, which in turn results in the individual’s success and happiness. The individual is always setting new goals in order to become the best person they can be. Arête, on the other hand, is defined as a virtue, or what makes something outstanding. According to Aristotle, virtues are a mean between deficiency and excess. This means that an individual has acquired a virtue when presented with a situation, the individual preforms

A virtue is "the mean between extremes" reflecting a state of human character and is expressed through voluntary actions, i.e. carried out knowingly, neither coincidentally nor compelled external forces (Irwin, 1999). According to Fisher and Lovell (2009), virtues are personal qualities that provide the basis for the individual to lead a good, noble, or happy life (Fisher & Lovell, 2003, p. 103). Aristotelian virtues are described in accordance with specific situations. For example, courage is discussed with respect to situations that provoke fear; justice is discussed with respect to situations calling for distributing resources (Hackett & Wang, 2012, p. 870).

Aristotle says that happiness is an activity of the soul in accord with virtue. A virtuous man is one who has been trained since childhood, a person who is rational and can control their impulses. A good person will always behave in a virtuous manner. Aristotle mentions two types of virtues, on relating to wisdom and one relating to character. Virtues of wisdom come through teachings.

Most virtue theorists take their inspiration from Aristotle and Socrates, who were founders of several major propositions in this theory. Although the philosophers belonged to different time periods, they held similar viewpoints regarding what value virtue and vice hold in an individual’s character. Socrates and Aristotle had different views on how many virtues and vices existed in a person. Aristotle worked most closely in developing the idea of eudaimonea, roughly translated as happiness, in his Nicomachean Ethics books, which were derived from numerously translated notes of his students. Although Aristotle’ thoughts are not clearly and explicitly stated, his teachings, through his students’ notes, provide enough information from which these theories and arguments can be deciphered.

In his work the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle posits the idea that many desirable characteristics, the virtues, are what he calls “means,” much like the concept of the average mean in mathematics. He states that these qualities are not extremes, but rather, the degree to which a given quality should be expressed so as to be virtuous falls somewhere between the extremes. He elaborates that specific locations of each mean are determined by their nature, that is, some virtues fall closer to one end of a spectrum than another end, and that from one individual situation to another, the specific location may change. Furthermore, Aristotle goes on to differentiate between a number of different subcategories of justice and describe how they connect to the theory of virtue as a mean. I assert that although Aristotle’s ideas are in some ways helpful, he fails to give a clear, adequate account of the true nature of justice, and fails as well to effectively connect it to his theory of virtue as a mean. Instead, his description of justice is muddled and inconsistent with his theory of virtue as a mean, and he does not achieve the objectives he sets out for himself regarding connecting the two theories.

In order to practice a virtuous lifestyle humans need to “develop a rational character. And that, according to Aristotle, is the same a moral goodness” (Rosenstand, 2013, p. 449). The process of becoming a good moral person takes hard work and dedication to continually do better and reach personal goals as well. Extremes in life will only cause issues, therefore the idea of moderation, or the “Golden Mean” is ideal for a well-balanced and virtuous lifestyle. Also, both intellectual and moral virtues are needed for a person to be truly virtuous.

Virtue, an attribute that contributes to the joyous functions of the human condition, is an instrumental component to the basis of a properly functioning human being, allowing humans to act rationally. We accumulate virtue by both understanding and participating in activities. For instance, by playing the piano, people become piano players (Aristotle Book 2 26-27). Virtue is essential to rationale. To act rationally and by doing just things, we become rational and just people (Aristotle Book 2 27). When an individual conducts just actions, then they will become good (Aristotle Book 2 32). However, an individual will not become good by simply philosophizing about just actions, rather they must conduct just actions to have a body in good condition (Aristotle Book 2 32). Aristotle

Virtue ethics teaches us how to live our lives habitually and naturally through virtuous character traits which are in balance between vices of lack and vices of excess. This balance between lack and excess is known as the Golden Mean and is essential to the core of virtue ethics. One who practices virtue ethics lives their life according to their character traits and moral values and therefore acts intrinsically in all situations. In other words, they do not need to consider how to act; they do so strictly out of habit and with the balance maintained through the Golden Mean. Virtue ethics were mostly derived from the theories of Aristotle.