Aristotle Flashcards
What is a virtue ?
Greek - “excellence”
A disposition possessed by people we admire
E.g. We admire people disposed to acting bravely
It is something that has to be cultivated by rational human beings over time, it’s not a one off tendency
What is holistic ?
A focus on the person rather than a particular act
What does it mean where ethics is agent centred as opposed to rule centred ?
It emphasises an individual’s character rather than following a set of rules
What is eudaimonia and how is it different to the utilitarian notion of happiness ?
Greek - flourishing
It is not just happiness in the sense of pleasure and is not a state of mind but is an objective state of wellbeing
It is fulfilling your goals or living well. It is the end goal of our activity as human beings. It is the result if living rationally and exercising virtuesZ
Aristotle often refers to it as “ the good “
What is the function argument ?
Link to Eudaimonia
1 everything has a function
2 humans therefore have a function
3 our function is determined by our distinctive or character activity
4 only humans have a rational soul. Aristotle says “the function of a man is an activity of the soul which follows or implies a rational principle”
5 our function of human beings is to live rationally
6 therefore a moral human lives a rational life of exercising their virtues excelling in the distinctly human quality of rationality
Fulfilling our function will lead to eudaimonia or flourishing - comes from fulfilling our goals - a way of living which can be objectively judged as good (and referred to by Aristotle as “the good”) compared to being s subjective state of mind
How might Sartre contradict the function argument ?
Sartre’s existentialism and humanism argues that humans don’t have s function but determine our own essence
What is plato’s balanced /unbalanced soul ?
The soul must be a balance of reason, desire and spirit in order for a virtuous life
If desire gets in control we become hedonistic and seek pleasure above everything else
If spirit gets control we become headstrong and rush into things too quickly
How might a virtuoso musician link to cultivating virtues?
How do they differ ?
Becoming a virtuoso musician and a virtuous person begins with imitation
I.e. Copying Hendrix to play the guitar or your parents rules for morality.
You then develop the skill of cultivating your own judgement (phronesis).
I.e. You may develop your own guitar riff or virtues / moral guide
However these 2 things differ as becoming virtuous is holistic and involved emotion in a way in which learning an instrument is not
What is phronesis (4)
The quality of good judgement or ‘practical wisdom’
Underlying virtue which enables other virtues
Also enables the application of the doctrine of the mean (guide to moral action) as you must have good judgement to apply it
Practical wisdom which comes from practicing being virtuous
It is a central virtue which guides all our actions and moral behaviour
What is the doctrine of the mean ?
How does our practical wisdom play in to this ?
Guide to moral action.
How a virtuous person should act in certain situations
- the middle ground between excess and deficiency
E.g. Courage is the mean between cowardice and fool-hardiness
Our practical wisdom, gained from practicing being virtuous and our rational function, enables us to follow this doctrine and judge the most virtuous action in situations
How is the doctrine of the mean more flexible than Kant’s categorical imperative and Bentham’s utility calculus ?
With lying ?
With human instinct ?
Not rule based,
Allows a situation to situation judgement from your practical wisdom and rational function
Lying could be the most virtuous thing to do in some instances e.g if your friend with an eating disorder asked if they looked big and they did; the most virtuous thing to may be to lie to not cause serious damage but not lie excessively to encourage their habit
U and Kant are both inflexible theories with human instinct ( with U opting to save the movie star over mother and Kant’s passionless fulfilment of duty compared to our desires ). Aristotelian ethics however is based on human rationality and the doctrine of the mean is enabled by this rationality allow flexibility and a form of situation based ethics
What is the purpose of Aristotle’s distinction between involuntary, voluntary and mixed actions?
Framework for moral and legal responsibility
Has the purpose to distinguish when we should judge/ praise / blame someone
For which type of actions does Aristotle believe we are morally responsible for ?
What actions are we not responsible for ?
In only deliberate actions we find virtue and are morally responsible for as these reveal our character
Not responsible for actions under compulsion or ignorance (with involuntary actions and non voluntary actions when remorse is shown - Aristotle is unclear if there is moral responsibility if remorse is not shown)
Describe how actions from compulsion would not lead to moral responsibility for Aristotle ?
1 if acts were entirely out of your control you should not bare any moral responsibility
E.g. A voyager blown off course and kidnapped
You would not be judged as immoral as there was nothing you could do to avoid this
2 if a choice was made and an action was committed under extreme distress
“Beyond anyone’s capacity to endure”
You would not bare moral responsibility for this action
E.g. Orwell’s 1984 where Winston was forced to make a choice between giving up his girlfriend or being tortured with rats. Torture would be beyond his capacity to endure, so his choice would have been made under compulsion,
He would therefore not be blamed for this action
Describe how actions performed under ignorance do not lead to moral responsibility / legal responsibility ?
Non voluntary actions are actions performed when an agent was unaware of crucial information about their action.
If you performed a non voluntary action and then found out the facts and regretted it, the action would become involuntary. You would not bare moral responsibility for this.
I.e Oedipus marrying his mother or a doctor giving the lethal injection by mistake when someone switched the needle .
NO MORAL RESPONSIBILITY
however if you performed this action and did not regret it, this action would still be non - voluntary
E.g the doctor giving the lethal injection feeling no remorse as they perhaps didn’t like the person.
You would have NO LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY
but
Aristotle is unclear if you would bare MORAL RESPONSIBILITY
