What Are Virtue Ethics? How They Relate to Moral Behavior

By Dr. Steven Wyre  |  12/09/2024

One aspect of philosophy is exploring why we should be moral and what theories philosophers use to justify any specific action over another. Often, the same action can be viewed as morally “right” or “wrong” using different theories.

The ultimate goal in studying moral philosophy is to find a reasonable theory or set of theories to guide one’s actions toward other humans. In our philosophy courses, we look at various ethical theories and how they can be applied in different situations to justify our actions when we face ethical dilemmas.

Ultimately, ethical theories come in three types:

• Consequentialist (utilitarianism) – an action’s morality depends on its outcome
• Non-consequentialist or deontological (e.g., Kantian ethics or Ross’s prima facie duties) – whether an action is itself right or wrong
• Virtue ethics – the actor is right or wrong in character and habits

Virtue ethics place one’s virtue and character at the center of ethical inquiry. This concept is traceable to Plato and Aristotle, but there have been more modern attempts to frame how we should act morally and be more amenable to sets of rules or general principles.

Scholar Julia Driver claims, “Utilitarianism is one of the most powerful and persuasive approaches to normative ethics in the history of philosophy.” While some philosophy students will gravitate toward deontological ethics, some form of utilitarianism still seems to be the big winner in terms of preferred guidance.

However, a growing number of students claim virtue ethics as the “North” in their moral compasses. For example, they see a focus on the person’s character as more important than weighing the value of specific actions.

Also, they see generosity and honesty as worthwhile without probing just what actions would fit the definition of generosity and honesty. For instance, honesty is a commendable goal, but without knowing what it truly means, it is an empty goal. As a result, it is not clear if students understand what virtue ethics are and how to apply an ethical theory correctly to live a moral life and be an ethical person who lives a good life.

Some Ground Rules for Moral Theories

Any viable moral theory should offer some justification for how the theory fits human nature. For example, utilitarianism is based on the notion that humans prefer pleasure over pain. Moral and rational egoism are based on the idea that humans not only are – but also should be – selfish for their own sake to some degree.

A useful moral theory should offer consistent guidance so that two rational beings in the same situation should reach the same conclusion about how to act ethically. If a chosen moral philosophy does not lead to human flourishing, then how can it be considered moral wisdom?

When Aristotle’s son Nicomachus was editing his father’s thoughts on ethics for the book “The Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle,” he focused on the possibility of achieving eudaimonia (well-being) for old Greek men who had sufficient means, were good-looking, and had “well-behaved” wives and kids. Many modern readers miss those stipulations and assume that all rational human beings can achieve the state of “happiness.”

The assumption is that such a feeling or mindset of happiness can only occur later in life. According to Aristotle, a younger man can be seen as “blessed” only if such a person possesses the right character traits and lives with such a mindset that he can never be miserable.

Know anyone who qualifies? Neither do I. Aristotle claimed it was very difficult to always do the right thing at the right time, to the right people, for the right reasons.

Aristotle stipulates that a virtuous person requires great practice and time to reach the end goal of happiness, and that achievement could be fleeting. However, Aristotelian virtue theory is not applicable today. We can still seek to justify our actions with virtue theory, but not with Aristotle’s version.

The Modern Version of Virtue Ethics

There are contemporary virtue ethics that are worthy of consideration. Virtue ethicists and scholars Rosalind Hursthouse and Glen Pettigrove discuss different contenders for the definition of virtue ethics, but assert that lacking practical wisdom is one way to fall short of being fully virtuous.

Even with updated versions, the assumption is that one needs many years of experience to be seen as virtuous. Unfortunately, most students who lean into virtue theory lack both the age and experiences to qualify.

Practically, all humans should strive to be just, courageous, temperate, and generous. Such virtues are definitely noteworthy and these virtues lead to a good life, we hope.

However, when does an act of kindness move from generosity to complicity in facilitating co-dependency? Can a person be courageous in defending the wrong person?

What is easier to process: “Bob is generous; go do as Bob would do” or “giving to those who lack from what you have in abundance without impoverishing yourself is generous”?

What if Bob is a generous person, but also a philanderer? Should we emulate all that Bob does despite our own moral principles?

Clearly, being virtuous is hard work and contrary to human nature. What about the notion of virtue itself – how should we define it?

How Is Virtue Defined?

One intractable problem for virtue ethics is how any disposition can be considered virtuous.

Saying why some action is virtuous without referring to either some deontological principle or possible consequence, good or bad, is challenging. But if we qualify some disposition as a virtue or vice using deontological or consequential principles, then why have another normative theory that is just more of the same?

Aristotle claimed that the virtuous man acts voluntarily, and virtuous behavior is a deliberate choice. However, any turn of events could ruin any chance of finding eudaimonia and the outcome of any action resulting from the deliberate choices of someone who believes he or she acted virtuously could be nothing more than luck.

In any event, there are myriad factors involved in virtuous behavior. The right action in the right amount at the right time could only be right purely by chance, and that is no way to guarantee consistent positive outcomes to a situation.

Any virtue ethic – or at least any type promoting eudaimonism – would not necessarily work. Even if practiced religiously, virtuous behavior would not guarantee the same results for the same actions.

Should We Not Strive to Be Virtuous and Live a Moral Life According to Moral Principles?

For all of human history, the virtuous and ethical person has been lauded as the hero and the unscrupulous person has been vilified.

Exceptions occur when clever individuals turn vice into virtues, such as Machiavelli’s Prince, Nietzsche’s Übermensch, or Rand’s rational egoist. For the most part, however, people who do the right thing are praised and set up in society as examples of ideal behavior.

In a previous article, “What Is Moral Relativism in Ethics? An In-Depth Examination,” I’ve argued that moral beliefs are developed in tandem with political and religious philosophies as our socialization became more sophisticated. Humans, as social beings, needed to develop better ways to work together for mutual survival, means creating rules and punishments for various behaviors.

Adding moral rules and creating stories of heroes and villains promote moral principles that are seen as virtuous by a given society. Society benefited by giving the just and generous person stories affirming that high moral character would lead to human flourishing. Such stories give people something to strive for and teach them to fear the villains.

Consider a person I’ll call “Virtuous Victoria.” Her sense of justice, fairness, generosity, and propriety are character traits praised as moral virtues and support the consensus opinion she has a virtuous character. When asking, "What would a virtuous person do?" the answer would be, "Do what Victoria would do."

However, when Victoria acts or chooses to refrain from some action, what moral principles motivate her apparent choice? She is acting or not acting due to some sense of moral duty or because of some desired virtuous outcome.

To classify an action as virtuous, that action must either bring about some greater state of being for the people involved in a situation or it should be based on some notion of what virtuous action would demand.

Moral maturity is achieved by consistently applying some universal rules (i.e., the categorical imperative of philosopher Immanuel Kant) or some general principle, such as seeking the greater good or ethics of care.

Putting the Cart Before the Horse?

Ideally, a useful moral theory should fit human nature. Virtue theory does not.

A useful moral theory should consistently guide behavior in similar situations to the same outcome. Virtue theory does not.

Simple reasoning suggests the best course of action would be to reject virtue theory as superfluous, unnecessary baggage that does not provide concrete guidance on how best to live a moral life. It is useful in a historical context or as a component in some other theory like care ethics.

However, virtues alone do not lead to moral maturity. They are the results of applying consequentialist or non-consequentialist principles to one's life as a rational human being seeking to live the best kind of life. Virtue ethics can affect various areas, such as medical ethics, business ethics, and moral duties.

Why, then, are so many people gravitating toward what amounts to a theory better reserved for describing mythological heroes? My suspicion is that deep division and decades of failed heroes leave younger generations with a hole they need to fill. Perhaps they seek to become what they cannot find without fully understanding what they seek or why.

The Philosophy Degree at American Public University

For adult learners interested in an introduction to ethics, virtue ethics, different types of philosophy, and other related issues, American Public University (APU) offers an online bachelor’s degree in philosophy. This degree program features courses such as an introduction to ethics, thinking and acting ethically, logic, and critical thinking. Other courses include ancient Western philosophy, medieval philosophy, religious existentialism, contemporary issues in philosophy, continental and post-modern philosophy, and analytical philosophy.

Courses in this degree program are taught by experienced instructors with a deep knowledge of different philosophical schools of thinking. For more information, visit our philosophy degree program page.