Question

Articulate a moral dilemma wherein one has to show a specific virtue or virtues (it can be any virtue or virtues including honesty, courage, charity/generosity, compassion, etc.)

• What is the moral dilemma about?
• What virtue or virtues should be shown? (You are here selecting the best course of action)
• Why is that virtue or those virtues to be shown?
• How should the virtue or virtues be expressed, and why in that manner?
• Apply Aristotle's golden mean to the dilemma.

Answer 1

Moral dilemmas are situations in which the decision-maker must consider two or more moral values or duties but can only honor one of them; thus, the individual will violate at least one important moral concern, regardless of the decision. ... In a false dilemma, the choice is actually between a right and a wrong

- The idea of working to become a better person by improving our good characteristics and getting rid of our bad ones.

-Virtue ethics is agent centred, that is to say, it is focused on the person improving themselves rather than following a set of rules

It focuses on a small number of traits that make the individual virtuous but ignores the big picture. Society today is far too big and complex to take note of a moral theory that only focuses on the small things. Modern governments (except those of which are Dictatorships) cannot make ethical decisions on the basis of individual character traits, they need to look at the consequences of actions on the population as a whole.

It ignores the relativist dilemma. Virtue in China may well be different to what it is in the UK

- Robert Louden stated that as Virtue Ethics is focused on the individual, it doesn't resolves big moral dilemmas. It may help make the moral agent virtuous but it does not give any answers in an ethical crisis

- As it is particularist it focuses on a small number of traits that make the individual virtuous, ignores the big picture. Society toady big and complex to only take note of a moral theory that only focuses on the small things. Modern governments (except those of which are Dictatorships) cannot make ethical decisions on the basis of individual character traits, they need to look at the consequences of actions on the population as a whole.

- It asserts that there are character traits, Gilbert Harman among other psychologists believe these to be an illusion.

- The Golden Mean cannot be universally applied to all people in all situations e.g. It may be courageous of a soldier to fight an equally matched opponent but foolhardy to fight a far greater one.

- It ignores the relativist dilemma. Virtue in China may well be different to what it is in the UK.

Aristotle's golden mean:

In terms of working out a virtue, Aristotle highlighted the importance of finding a 'golden mean' in qualities of character( for Aristotle living a good life meant following the doctrine of the mean-the middle path between extremes). He said that all virtues have two vices, or extremes: the vice of deficiency (too little) and the vice of excess (too much). In the middle of those two vices lies the virtue. Finding the golden mean between the vices is how to work out a virtue; Aristotle doesn't give any tips on how to do this or what happens when people disagree on virtues, though, which is a major flaw in virtue ethics. If you take the example of the virtue of 'bravery', it may go a little like this:

1.The vice of deficiency for bravery is cowardice - there's not enough of the virtue

2.The vice of excess for bravery is foolishness - there's too much of the virtue

3.Right in the middle lies 'bravery' itself - the midway point between the two vices