Consideration of virtue ethics vs. ethics of behavior, two separate philosophical frameworks that influence decision-making in moral quandaries, is a common starting point for ethical debates. Developing virtuous character characteristics like bravery, candor, and empathy is at the heart of virtue ethics, which draws on the writings of classical thinkers like Aristotle. The text highlights the need of developing a morally excellent character and argues that good deeds are a result of a good character. Ethics of behavior, on the other hand, includes consequentialist and deontological views and emphasizes following moral standards or seeking good results rather than character development. Although both schools of thought have much to teach, virtue ethics distinguishes themselves by taking a more all-encompassing view, which sees ethical conduct as inextricably linked with developing virtuous character. An individual’s activities are guided by their character, which in turn promotes personal growth and the formation of societies that are morally upright. Thus, although instructions for moral decision-making may be found in ethics of conduct, a more complete and complex framework can be found in virtue ethics, which places an emphasis on developing virtuous character qualities as crucial for leading an ethical life.
Understanding virtue ethics
According to Rosenstand (2020), the concept of virtue ethics has its roots in the works of ancient Greek philosophers like Aristotle, notably in his Nicomachean Ethics. An individual’s conduct should be guided by principles of moral perfection, according to virtue ethics, which places an emphasis on cultivating virtuous character qualities. The notion of eudaimonia, which means “flourishing” or “well-being” in Greek, is fundamental to this approach since it stands for the pinnacle of human flourishing in virtue ethics. Virtues are attributes that help one live a good life, and eudaimonia is the state of having these qualities (Cavallaro & Heffernan, 2019). According to Aristotle, one should make it a habit to live a good life in order to develop qualities like bravery, moderation, knowledge, justice, and compassion. The foundation of this system rests on Aristotle’s virtue ethics. Having excellent character is crucial for obtaining eudaimonia, and it explains virtue, the role of practical knowledge (phronesis), and moral decision-making. Virtue ethics has had a lasting impact on modern ethical theory and practice because of its emphasis on the importance of developing one’s character and virtues as a means to an end—the flourishing of the human spirit.
Understanding the Ethics of Conduct
Normative ethics, which includes the ethics of behavior, is defined by its emphasis on responsibilities, norms, and consequences as means to ascertain the rightness or wrongness of an activity. According to Rosenstand (2020) conduct ethics is a theory of morality that judges whether an activity is right or wrong according to whether it follows moral principles and the consequences of this action. Our method is to follow the moral commitments and duties, regardless the private inclinations. The most recognizable ways of ethical behavior are utilitarianism and deontology. As per the utilitarianism, all the decisions are based upon results and maxima the total happiness, which can be collective utility of the majority of the people of the society; the philosophers like Bentham and Mill believe this The deontological school of thought, comprising Kantian ethics, as opposed to the consecturial school of thought, maintains that one should do what is right without any regard to the cost. These ideas show how to make moral decisions by outlining the standards by which we should live and the duties we should shoulder while deciding what is right and wrong.
Comparison of Virtue Ethics and Ethics of Conduct
When contrasting ethics of conduct with virtue ethics, one can see that the two systems place different emphasis on norms and on deeds and, more specifically, on character. The necessity of building habits and dispositions that lead to moral perfection is emphasized in virtue ethics, which stresses fostering virtuous character qualities as the basis for ethical decision-making (Nguyen & Crossan, 2022). On the other hand, ethics of behavior places an emphasis on following moral principles and norms, often judging the rightness or wrongness of acts according to how well they fit these molds. According to virtue ethics, when confronted with a moral conundrum, one should try to put themselves in the shoes of a good person. In contrast, ethics of conduct may prioritize following specific rules or maximizing good outcomes. While virtue ethics offers a nuanced understanding of moral agency and personal development, ethics of conduct provide clear guidelines and objective criteria for evaluating actions. However, virtue ethics may be criticized for its subjectivity and lack of concrete rules. In contrast, ethics of conduct may be charged for its rigidity and potential to overlook the complexities of individual circumstances. Therefore, while each approach has strengths and weaknesses, understanding the interplay between character and action is essential for effective ethical decision-making.
Arguments for virtue ethics
Virtue ethics presents compelling arguments that emphasize moral development and personal growth. Unlike ethics of conduct, which may prioritize adherence to rules or outcomes, virtue ethics focuses on cultivating virtuous character traits as foundational to ethical decision-making. By prioritizing moral development, individuals are encouraged to strive towards excellence and self-improvement, fostering a deeper understanding of morality beyond mere compliance with external standards. Moreover, virtue ethics offers flexibility in handling complex moral situations by prioritizing the development of practical wisdom (phronesis), enabling individuals to navigate ethical dilemmas with nuance and discernment. Additionally, virtue ethics underscores the importance of cultivating virtuous communities and relationships, recognizing that moral excellence is often nurtured within supportive social networks. For instance, Aristotle’s concept of the golden mean illustrates the virtue of moderation, advocating for avoiding extremes and the pursuit of balance in moral conduct (Hyun Hwang & Scott Kretchmar, 2010). This exemplifies how virtue ethics encourages individuals to cultivate habits of excellence that lead to moral flourishing, fostering personal growth and the creation of virtuous communities where ethical values are upheld and celebrated.
Arguments for the Ethics of Conduct
Ethics of conduct advocates for a structured and systematic approach to moral decision-making, offering clear and objective moral guidelines that individuals can rely on when faced with ethical dilemmas. According to Johnson et al. (2022), this clarity provides a sense of certainty and direction, enabling individuals to navigate complex situations confidently. By adhering to established rules and principles, individuals can ensure consistency and fairness in their actions, fostering a sense of justice within society. In addition to this, the embedded philosophy of fairness and justice in conduct ethics reaffirms its dedication to preserving moral uprightness and delivering just outcomes for everyone involved. Such concern of the ethical principles makes society system conformable to the ethical values and morality to ensure good conduct is important for keeping order in society.
Besides, the congruence of conduct code’s ethical principles with legal doctrine and moral values of the society expands the scope of its practical use. The ethical principles aligned with the legal regulations offer individuals a guide for handling moral conflicts and legal entanglements. The society cohesion and stability is assured by following ethical guidelines comparable with societal expectations. Utilitarianism and deontology – two major ethical approaches of the moral conduct ethics – reinforce their effectiveness by providing systematic methods of ethical reasoning. Such frameworks offer the tools for individuals to analyze the implications of their actions and determine their moral duties making it possible for them to make sound decisions in different situations.
Evaluation of Virtue Ethics and Ethics of Conduct
When considering virtue ethics and ethics of conduct, the criteria are moral agency, flourishing, and societal impact. Virtue ethics focuses on moral agency by insisting that individuals can cultivate virtuous character traits and act ethically voluntarily. From this point of view, personal responsibility and self-evaluation is emphasized in the honest decision making processes. Differently from the principle of conduct, ethics of conduct stresses more external factors like rule-based ethics or utilitarian consequences at the expense of individual moral agency. Yet, ethics of conduct emphasizes the significance of duty and moral obligation, shaping people’s sense of accountability within the society.
Furthermore, virtue ethics and ethics of conduct propose unique approaches to eudaimonia. Virtue ethics states that true flourishing is possible only through the development of virtuous character traits and pursuit of moral excellence. For Cavallaro & Heffernan (2019), a good life entails more than mere law-following or successful outcomes pursuit; rather, it requires character virtues development resulting in personal fulfillment and genuine happiness. In contrast, the morality of action may focus on external indicators of success or happiness, for example, wealth or pleasure, while leaving the individual’s character undisturbed. Nevertheless, conduct ethical theories that are consequentialist have a similar goal of maximizing overall well-being but through different methods. Thus, although both methods recognize the significance of well-being, virtue ethics offers a better grasp of the inner traits and virtues responsible for true flourishing.
In the practice and cases, virtue ethics and ethics of conduct provide insights for moral behaviour. As an example, think about a situation where an individual has to decide whether to lie to protect a friend from harm. A virtue ethicist may claim that honesty is a noble character trait. Hence, lying would be morally wrong, irrespective of the outcome. Instead of this, a utilitarian moral philosopher would put an emphasis on the well-being of all and claim that lying in this case is acceptable if it prevents bigger harm. Such case studies reveal the subtle differences between how virtue ethics and ethics of conduct deal with moral conflict. Ethically, culture and context are very important as they influence how people perceive issues. The values or principles of various cultures may be given precedence over others resulting in diverse ethical norms and behavior. In the same vein, societal structures and institutions play a role in moral decision-making as depicted through the legal system’s focus on adherence to laws and regulations. Consequently, even though virtue ethics and conduct ethics supply insightful ethical deliberation frameworks, their implementation and interpretation can differ due to cultural and context variances.
Counterarguments and rebuttals
Critics of virtue ethics argue generally that it is subjective and lacks clear rules of action. Critics argue that the dependence on individualistic virtuous character traits make virtue ethics incoherent due to inconsistency and moral relativism. Besides, there are those who believe that virtue ethics may not provide concrete answers for solving moral dilemmas or providing guidance for explicit behavior as it gives more attention to the development of character rather than following moral rules or looking at consequences. On the other side, objections to the duty-based ethics are attributed mostly to their inflexibility and tendency to over-simplification in moral reasoning. Critics like Bartels et al. (2015) contend that sticking to moral rules or outcome-based favor could overlook the intricacies faced in real situations and the subtleties of human morality. In addition, utilitarian approaches such as utilitarianism are accused of potentially using as justification immoral actions if they lead to the greatest good in the whole, disregarding the rights of individuals and the intrinsic value of some actions.
Moreover, these criticisms can be refuted via nuanced responses that showcase the merits of virtue ethics but also admit its drawbacks. Although virtue ethics might base their virtuous character traits to some extent on subjectivity, it highlights the necessity of moral education and acquisition of practical wisdom, which could help individuals handle moral complexity better. Moreover, virtue ethics provides a dynamic model which promotes the cultivation of virtues in reaction to varying circumstances, facilitating flexible and culturally sensitive moral practice. Likewise, the ethics of conduct might have clear rules of actions, but often neglects the significance of character building and the nurturing of moral virtues, that is, the sources of moral behaviour over the long run. Virtue ethics underscores the inherent goodness of virtuous character traits and their role in shaping thriving individuals and communities. As such, it provides a more inclusive and long-lasting approach to ethical living that addresses the challenges of human morality, directing individuals toward a meaningful moral life.
Conclusion
Lastly, virtue ethics and ethics of conduct have shown a strong debate in ethical theory which each has its pros and cons. Virtue ethics, emphasizing character development, is in this paper presented as a more all-encompassing foundation for making ethical decisions. Virtue ethics approaches human cultivation through personal development, flourishing and building virtuous communities centered on the development of virtuous characters. On the contrary, the ethics of conduct provides valuable prescriptions for moral acts, but thus it mostly does not focus on the importance of character development and intrinsic value of virtuous traits. Considering the arguments put forward, it becomes clear that virtue ethics gives a deeper understanding of what it means to live a morally good life by linking character development with decision-making on the moral level which the ethics of conduct fails to do. Thus, individuals and societies are motivated to study and explore ethical theories in depth including character in moral philosophy as guiding principles for ethical living and societal flourishing.
References
Bartels, D. M., Bauman, C. W., Cushman, F. A., Pizarro, D. A., & McGraw, A. P. (2015). Moral judgment and decision making. The Wiley Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making, 2, 478-515. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781118468333.ch17
Cavallaro, M., & Heffernan, G. (2019). From happiness to blessedness: Husserl on eudaimonia, virtue, and the best life. HORIZON. Феноменологические исследования, 8(2), 353-388. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/from-happiness-to-blessedness-husserl-on-eudaimonia-virtue-and-the-best-life
Hyun Hwang, J., & Scott Kretchmar, R. (2010). Aristotle’s golden mean: Its implications for the doping debate. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 37(1), 102-121. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00948705.2010.9714769
Johnson, M. K., Weeks, S. N., Peacock, G. G., & Domenech Rodriguez, M. M. (2022). Ethical decision-making models: A taxonomy of models and review of issues. Ethics & Behavior, 32(3), 195-209. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10508422.2021.1913593
Nguyen, B., & Crossan, M. (2022). Character-infused ethical decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 178(1), 171-191. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-021-04790-8
Rosenstand, N. (2020). The moral of the story: An introduction to ethics. Mayfield Publishing.
write