Compare Virtue Ethics and Kantian Ethics. What are the strengths of each approach? What are the weaknesses of these approaches? Which would you prefer to use and why? Write a couple of paragraphs (6 sentences or more each) answering these questions. This should highlight what you find most interesting - quotes to back up answers, & not just a summary of the reading but your opinion too.

Reference: Beyond Bumper Sticker Ethics by Steve Wilkens

those found in the classical writers. They agree with Plato and Aristotle that these moral qualities will not become part of a person's life by default. Simply discuss- ing alternative viewpoints does not yield better people. Instead, certain character traits are superior and should be taught, both verbally and by example. Moreover, they argue that the rightness of these vir- tues will be evident to any rational per- son. For these modern virtue theorists, as for Plato and Aristotle, ethics is not simply a separate compartment among others in a human life. Everything comes down to the quality of one's character. Positive Aspects of Virtue Ethics Humans are multifaceted beings, and a comprehensive ethical system should provide guidance in all aspects of life. Vir- tue ethics does well on this point because character comes into play in the social, Page 139 of 231 58% vocational, individual and spiritual sides of our lives. The person who is a citizen, a soldier, a Christian and a parent can nd direction in moral virtue. Virtue also adds a dimension that a pure rule-based or utilitarian approach struggles to include. Rules are rules and results are results, regardless of who is involved. However, the nature of our re- lationships or the specics of a situation frequently become important factors. For example, while it may be virtuous to make difcult cutbacks in your lifestyle and take out a second mortgage on the house to help pay college tuition for your child, you may also think it would be foolish to do the same thing to put an un- known twenty-year-old Belgian student through school. Two different acts might technically qualify as murders, but a hus- band who kills his wife who was suffer- ing greatly in the nal stages of terminal cancer might be judged differently than a gang member who kills a child in a drive- by shooting. Page 139 of 231 58% In both cases our relationship to the people involved and the circumstances are relevant features. Character ethics al- lows us to balance these personal aspects of a decision with objective standards. On the one hand, right and wrong are not whatever we want them to be. Virtue is not the same thing as personal prefer- ence. On the other hand, we can still take into consideration unique obligations and responsibilities for family or friends. An approach that looks to ethical ideals also seems to satisfy another intu- ition. While morality can be discussed in terms of right and wrong, these categor- ies seem to be too constrictive for the way we see things in everyday life. There are degrees of goodness and badness. For ex- ample, many people feel that all abortion is wrong. Even so, some may not assign the same level of blame to a fourteen- year-old who gets an abortion after being raped by her uncle as they would assign to a thirty-one-year-old woman who is sexu- ally promiscuous, uses no form of birth Page 140 of 231 58% control and has just come in for her third abortion in ve years. Since virtue ethics sees goodness on a continuum that points toward an ideal, it allows us to express the entire range of ethical evaluations. Approaching morality from the direc- tion of virtue also makes sense because it recognizes that a good act is not necessar- ily the same thing as a good person. Hitler may have occasionally acted with great compassion toward some individuals, but this does not make him a compassionate man. Moreover, a good person can act \"out of character\" and do something that goes contrary to his or her normal behavior. A single poor choice does not make a person bad. This approach frees us from limiting our judgments to a single event or action. An additional advantage of virtue ethics is that it allows us to include a number of desirable qualities that seem difcult to absorb into a rule-based the- ory. For example, many people would agree that a good person is tactful, patient and generous. And while it sounds nat- Page 140 of 231 58% Potential Problems in Virtue Ethics 1. Does virtue ethics help us know what to do? While we have highlighted places where virtue ethics lls gaps left by de- ontological or utilitarian approaches, this does not necessarily mean that it is a suicient replacement. Important ques- tions can be raised as to whether this the- ory itself can stand alone. One reason for this doubt is that character ethics seems to give little concrete guidance in actual situations. We can think of any number of cases in which people will agree on what dis- positions are virtuous but will reach very different, even opposite, conclusions about what virtuous people ought to do. Imagine a conversation between two compassionate people. One will argue that compassion requires that we in- crease monetary support of those on Page 141 of 231 59% welfare. As this individual defines com- passion, a compassionate person wants welfare recipients to have better oppor- tunities in housing, education and other areas of basic need. However, the other compassionate person may argue just the opposite. If we really care, she says, we will cut off welfare benefits, because wel- fare encourages people to become takers rather than givers. Instead of helping people through welfare, we teach depend- ency. Since dependency is a vice, com- passion requires that we force people to become industrious and self-sufficient for their own benefit. We do not resolve this disagreement by moving to a different virtue-to just- ice, for example. The first person may say that justice means that people should get what they deserve and that since humans deserve decent food, health services and housing, the just solution is to provide greater benefits for the poor. The second person, however, may say that getting what you deserve means getting what Page 142 of 231 59%you earn. Since welfare represents un- earned benets, it is unjust. Both of these individuals can be truly compassionate and just people and even have the same denitions of compassion and justice, yet still have sincere disagree- ments over what compassionate and just people should do. This has led some scholars to see virtue ethics as incom- plete. Even when we agree which charac- ter traits are good, we still have to act. However, we have seen in these examples that virtue ethics does not help us untan- gle the question of what actions should follow from our dispositions. In fact, the same virtues lead these two people to mu- tually exclusive solutions. If virtue can- not tell us what acts should follow from good character, is something lacking? 2. Can virtues be used badly? Accord- ing to character ethics, if a person acts in conformity with virtue, then the act is good. However, is it possible to act ac- cording to a virtue, or even a number of virtues, and do evil? For example, courage Page 142 of 231 59% those found in the classical writers. They agree with Plato and Aristotle that these moral qualities will not become part of a person's life by default. Simply discuss- ing alternative viewpoints does not yield better people. Instead, certain character traits are superior and should be taught, both verbally and by example. Moreover, they argue that the rightness of these vir- tues will be evident to any rational per- son. For these modern virtue theorists, as for Plato and Aristotle, ethics is not simply a separate compartment among others in a human life. Everything comes down to the quality of one's character. Positive Aspects of Virtue Ethics Humans are multifaceted beings, and a comprehensive ethical system should provide guidance in all aspects of life. Vir- tue ethics does well on this point because character comes into play in the social, Page 139 of 231 58% vocational, individual and spiritual sides of our lives. The person who is a citizen, a soldier, a Christian and a parent can nd direction in moral virtue. Virtue also adds a dimension that a pure rule-based or utilitarian approach struggles to include. Rules are rules and results are results, regardless of who is involved. However, the nature of our re- lationships or the specics of a situation frequently become important factors. For example, while it may be virtuous to make difcult cutbacks in your lifestyle and take out a second mortgage on the house to help pay college tuition for your child, you may also think it would be foolish to do the same thing to put an un- known twenty-year-old Belgian student through school. Two different acts might technically qualify as murders, but a hus- band who kills his wife who was suffer- ing greatly in the nal stages of terminal cancer might be judged differently than a gang member who kills a child in a drive- by shooting. Page 139 of 231 58% In both cases our relationship to the people involved and the circumstances are relevant features. Character ethics al- lows us to balance these personal aspects of a decision with objective standards. On the one hand, right and wrong are not whatever we want them to be. Virtue is not the same thing as personal prefer- ence. On the other hand, we can still take into consideration unique obligations and responsibilities for family or friends. An approach that looks to ethical ideals also seems to satisfy another intu- ition. While morality can be discussed in terms of right and wrong, these categor- ies seem to be too constrictive for the way we see things in everyday life. There are degrees of goodness and badness. For ex- ample, many people feel that all abortion is wrong. Even so, some may not assign the same level of blame to a fourteen- year-old who gets an abortion after being raped by her uncle as they would assign to a thirty-one-year-old woman who is sexu- ally promiscuous, uses no form of birth Page 140 of 231 58% be made between a number of concepts central to ethics, such as human freedom, universal obligation, rules, the will and duty. Positive Aspects of Kantian Ethics While some see the abstract nature of Kant's ethics as a negative, others are hesitant about his theory for a different reason. The heavy emphasis on words like duty and rules gives his system a dry and dreary feel. However, these very terms are what attract others to Kant's system, and for good reason. Duty takes us back to the intuition that some things are right no matter what. It helps anchor moral- ity so that we are not swayed by chan- ging moods and emotions, or sidetracked by unpredictable consequences. We court danger when the basis of our choices is arbitrary and changeable. Relying on the Page 121 of 231 50% concept of duty seems like a good way to avoid that danger. Rules can be aggravating because they illuminate our shortcomings. Because a law like \"do not steal\" has an objective status that separates it from our emotions and wants, it does not care how we feel about stealing. This detachment can be of great benet if we are interested in know- ing what is true. We often ght a battle between what we would like to be true and what is actually true. We do not al- ways want \"do not steal\" to be true. Thus, as Kant points out, our desires may blind us to what is right. His system tries to take us beyond the nonethical question, What do I want? to the ethical issue, What is right? and this seems to move us in the right direction. Furthermore, if ethical truth is truth in the normal sense of the word, we have to acknowledge that ethical beliefs are ei- ther right or wrong. Mathematicians and scientists do not see truths in their elds as something that can be compromised. Page 121 of 231 50% They might change their beliefs about what is true when it is reasonable to do so, but the universe itself does not change. All that has changed is their view of it. Kant says the same thing is true about ethics. Ethical laws are not open to ne- gotiation. It is possible to hold unreason- able beliefs about ethics, but this is a problem with our understanding of right and wrong, not a problem with right and wrong itself. This is why Kant's ethics has so much appeal to people who are not simply looking for a way to justify what they want to believe, but who really want to know what is right. Another positive point follows from this. Irrationality can be frightening when it comes to ethics, so there is merit in stating that ethics should be rational. Most people are willing to accept the au- thority of reason, at least in theory. We may disagree about what is reasonable, but people generally seem to agree that of two conclusions, the one with better reasons to support it is the better conclu- Page 122 of 231 51% sion. Therefore, it is dicult to disagree with Kant's assertion that an ethical con- clusion that can be rationally supported is preferable to one that is not rationally supported. Moreover, Kant connects rationality with the universalization of categorical imperatives in a way that coincides with the moral intuitions of many people. Kant says we should put ourselves in other people's shoes. If we would be unwilling to have other people adopt the maxim we are considering, we should not act on it ourselves. If what we propose to do uses someone as a means to an end, we should not do it. This may not make us want to do what we should. However, most will agree that it provides a good way to check whether our wants are ethical. Although Kant afrms the existence of God, God has no place in Kantian ethics. Kant wants reason alone to be the foun- dation of moral truth. Despite the absence of God from Kant's ethical system, many have found much in it that is compat- Page 122 of 231 51% ible with Christianity. For example, the idea that ethics is objective-that things are right and wrong regardless of what anyone thinks about them-matches well with the ideas of most Christians. More- over, many of the ethical rules Kant comes up with through the Categorical Impera- tive parallel what we find in the Ten Com- mandments. Finally, Scripture's assump- tion that its basic ethical directives are in- tended for everyone fits well with Kant's demand that rules be universalized. For these reasons many have argued that, with some modifications, his approach is an option for Christians. Potential Problems for Kantian Ethics 1. What happens when there is a conflict of duties? If a murderer came through the door seeking to kill an innocent person, would you lie when the killer asks where the intended victim is? There is a good Page 123 of 231 51%chance you will say yes to this question. There is also a good chance that you be- lieve the lie is justiable because it causes less harm than aiding in the murder of an innocent person. In other words, you would look at the results. However, we should recall Kant's position that results have no bearing on whether something is right or wrong. It is rationality, not con- sequences, that judges the rightness of human actions. The example of whether we should lie to a murderer comes from Kant himself, and he concludes that we should not lie, even if it leads to murderll His ration- ale is that, were we to allow lying to mur- derers, our behavior would be guided by a maxim like this: It is right to lie. (Let's call this maxim 1.) But this is not a maxim we would want to universalize. As we have already seen, lying requires the existence of truth. It is useless to tell a lie if the lie will not be believed. When maxim 1 is universalized Page123 of 231 51% so that everyone is morally obligated to lie, truth would no longer exist, and lying ends up in absurdity because we would not believe anything we were told. Lying is thus self-contradictory, so we should allow our decision to be guided by an- other rule: We should not lie. (Maxim 2) Kant says that this is a rule we would want everyone to adopt and therefore it is a dutya categorical imperative. We should never lie, even when confronted by a murderer seeking a victimjl What Kant does not appear to recog- nize is that it is possible to universalize more than one rule in this case. Our de- cision about whether to reveal the where- abouts of an intended victim also turns on whether we will decide to adopt a maxim like the following: You should help those who seek to murder innocent people. (Maxim 3) Page 124 of 231 51% Using Kant's Categorical Imperative, it would seem irrational to universalize this law as well. Therefore we should not act on it. However, we would be able to uni- versalize its opposite: You should not help those who seek to mur- der innocent people. (Maxim 4) Here is the problem. We have two maxims (2 and 4) that we would be will- ing to elevate to categorical imperatives. However, they conict in this case. If we adopt maxim 2, as Kant says we should, we cannot adopt maxim 4. On the other hand, the only way we can put maxim 4 into action is by lying, thus violating maxim 2. This presents real problems for Kant's ethics, because he relies on the premise that it is never ethical to vio- late a categorical imperative. It does not look like we have a choice here. Some- times choosing between two rules that can be universalized is unavoidable, and Kant does not have any way to resolve this problem. Page 124 of 231 52% 2. Does Kant avoid circumstances com- pletely? Kant says consequences are irrele- vant to the question of whether an act is right or wrong. Instead, we know what is right by embracing laws that can be willed for all people. When that requires us to help a person who intends to murder someone, we might question the wisdom of completely ignoring consequences in making ethical decisions, as Kant argues we should. Moreover, it is also question- able whether Kant himself successfully eliminates a consideration of results from his system. Suppose we do not have enough money to buy a car. Is it right to steal it? Kant's answer is no, and his reason would be something like this: Stealing assumes that people have a right to their property. If everyone stole, the concept of property would be undermined. We would have only temporary possession of things, not ownership of property. However, you can- not steal something that no one owns. Page 124 of 231 52%