Max Marcy
Moral Theory
PHI 192 M001
First Paper
Aristotle's virtue ethics and John stuart Mills utilitarianism are two schools of thought with vast differences. That being said, they both share the idea of happiness being the greatest end or good that we can strive for, it’s just the way that they go about describing how one reaches or interacts with this greatest good that is different. Trying to decide which one of these theories is more compelling is a very challenging task, but as you will see there are some major issues I have with utilitarianism that makes virtue ethics much more enticing.
Utilitarianism is a moral theory that focuses on the consequences of the actions that one takes and ignores any intentions that one could have for making those actions. The actions that we take are measured in the overall happiness they provide, which utilitarians believe is the final end or goal of human existence. The ultimate good that a utilitarian strives for is the overall happiness of all people which is intuitive because happiness is a common goal that all people have in common. Utilitarians focus on achieving the greatest good for the greatest number of people. One of the draws of utilitarianism is that it is a philosophy that encourages one to pursue pleasure, which is something most people find attractive, but it focuses on the greatest good for the greatest number of people, so it may also mean sacrificing one’s own pleasure to help achieve a greater happiness for all. All in all, a utilitarian moral philosophy would require one to do things they didn’t want to do if it promoted the happiness of others.
Virtue ethics is a moral theory that focuses on the character and virtue of the individual. One who strives to be virtuous will focus on being a good person rather than doing good actions because a good person will effortlessly do good things. Aristotle believed that all things have an inner nature or a proper function. For example, the function of glass is to hold water and if it can’t do that it is not following its proper function. Humans have a proper function as well. Humans need to be healthy and fertile, but so do animals, humans are social animals, so we also have the function of reasoning and living in a society. Aristotle puts it this way: “They define living in the case of animals as a capacity for perception, and in the case of human beings as a capacity for perception or thought. But a capacity is traced back to its activity, and what is authoritative resides in the activity. So it seems that living is, in the authoritative sense, perceiving or thinking. And living is among the things in themselves good and pleasant” (aristotle 9.9.1170a16-20). Along with the ability to reason, humans also have the capacity for virtue. According to Aristotle, for one to be virtuous one must work to develop their character. Aristotle understood virtue as the the midpoint between the extreme vices of excess and deficiency, which he called the golden mean. For example, the virtue of honesty is the golden mean, where failing to say the things that need to be said is deficient, but brutal honesty is excessive. The golden mean depends on the situation and takes practice to master the right balance. Aristotle believed that virtuous was something that one can learn how to be and through practice virtue will become habit.
One thing that utilitarianism and virtue ethics have in common is that they both believe happiness is the highest good. Aristotle argues that happiness is an almost unfathomable good and we strive to be virtuous because it will help us reach the highest good, happiness (Aristotle, 1097a35-1097b). Utilitarians also believe that the highest human good is happiness and do everything in there power to promote that happiness for the most people. “The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals, Utility, or the Greatest Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (Mills, page 2 paragraph 2). Mills describes the Greatest Happiness Principle in this quote and defines it as the “foundation of morals” or what it means to be good.
To choose which is more compelling, virtue ethics or utilitarianism, is a very daunting task, but there is one major problem with utilitarianism that makes it very distasteful as a moral theory. The Greatest Happiness Principle of utilitarianism explains how we should consider the happiness of the greatest number of people. In other words the needs of the many outway the needs of the few. Ursula Le Guin sheds light on why this is a problem in her short story “The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas”. The story describes a kind of utopian society where there is no suffering or pain and only happiness for most of its citizens, but the only way to maintain this pain-free society is by keeping a child locked up and in a constant state of suffering. Le Guin simplifies the idea of the Greatest Happiness Principle and illustrates the dark side of inequality that utilitarianism can justify. The child is sacrificing his happiness to promote the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. Keeping this story in mind, it seems as though utilitarians could even justify slavery because the greater number of people are gaing means for their happiness even though a slightly less numerous class of people are suffering.
Virtue ethics is compelling because it focuses on the individuals virtues. For aristotle virtue is something that we can always keep working on. This is different than utilitarianism because instead of one trying to comprehend how their actions will affect humanity as a whole, one can focus on improving their personal virtue and the way oneself can contribute to the good of society. It is easier to understand that one can always build and grow their character. Instead of asking one to assess every situation that one is in to try and come up with the action that will yield the greatest consequences (like utilitarianism), Aristotle only asks that we learn and practice doing virtuous actions until they become habit. “Hence even some who are without knowledge—those who have experience, among others—are more skilled in acting than are others who have knowledge” (Aristotle 1141b). Aristotle believed one will learn virtues through experience. Therefore, a person who has lived and done actions will learn which ones are virtuous and will eventually make the good actions without having to think about them. This, Aristotle states, may even be more beneficial than knowledge.
Aristotle and John Stuart Mills both have very extensive and specific ideas on how one is supposed to live one's life and achieve the greatest good of human happiness. The way in which these theories on morals believe that you go about achieving this happiness is completely different.
Bibliography
Aristotle. Translated by Terence Irwin, Second ed., Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.
Le Guin, Ursula. Harper Perennial, 1975.
Mill, John Stuart. Edited by George Sher, second edition ed., Hackett publishing company, Inc.