Human issues VE

Question 1

How would VE approach abortion in terms of the cultivation of virtue?

Answer 1

-Virtue Ethics is an agent-centred theory rooted in Aristotle’s concept of eudaimonia — a life of flourishing through the cultivation of virtue. Rather than assessing the morality of actions like abortion based on fixed rules or consequences Virtue Ethics asks whether the decision reflects good moral character
-Aristotle taught that moral virtues, such as courage, compassion, and justice, are developed through habitual practice and are guided by phronesis — practical wisdom
-When applied to abortion, the theory does not offer a clear-cut answer, but encourages the individual to consider whether the choice is made in a way that expresses moral maturity
-This could involve weighing emotional, social, and psychological aspects of the situation to determine whether the action reflects a virtuous life
-The focus is on becoming a good person, rather than simply doing the right act.

Question 2

How would VE approach abortion in terms of the cultivation of vices?

Answer 2

-In cases of abortion, Virtue Ethics considers the motives and attitudes behind the decision, rather than defining abortion itself as right or wrong
-For instance, someone choosing abortion due to fear or irresponsibility might be acting from vice, while someone who makes the decision after careful, compassionate reflection could be acting virtuously
-Modern virtue ethicist Rosalind Hursthouse supports this approach, writing that the central question is not about rights or utility, but “what sort of character the decision expresses
-There is no universal rule in Virtue Ethics that prohibits or permits abortion; instead, it depends on how the action contributes to the development of the agent’s character
-Therefore, Virtue Ethics offers a nuanced, case-by-case approach to abortion, rooted in personal virtue and moral seriousness, rather than external codes

Question 3

How could you argue that VE doesn’t give a clear approach to abortion issues?

Answer 3

-At the heart of Virtue Ethics is Aristotle’s concept of eudaimonia, or flourishing, which is achieved through developing virtues like courage, justice, and compassion
-However, Aristotle gives no direct guidance on specific moral issues such as abortion
-Rosalind Hursthouse, a key modern virtue ethicist, argues that abortion is not a question of rights or rules, but of “what sort of character the decision expresses.” She claims that a virtuous woman would treat the decision seriously and not treat abortion lightly — but this still leaves the outcome open
-One person might believe that continuing a difficult pregnancy is an act of courage, while another might view abortion as a compassionate or responsible decision
-Hursthouse herself admits that Virtue Ethics offers “no decision procedure,” which means it gives little practical help in deciding what to do. In cases where moral action is urgently needed, this lack of a clear standard leaves the agent relying entirely on interpretation.

Question 4

How could you argue that VE does infact offer a clear approach to abortion?

Answer 4

-Supporters of Virtue Ethics argue that this lack of a rigid formula is a strength. Rather than applying inflexible rules, the theory encourages deep moral reasoning and sensitivity to personal and social context
-Hursthouse defends this approach by stating that “it is not particularly helpful to be told that abortion is morally permissible or impermissible,” and that what matters is how the decision is made and whether it is made virtuously
-For example, consider a woman who becomes pregnant as a result of sexual assault
-Rather than blindly following a rule that either prohibits or permits abortion, Virtue Ethics would ask whether the decision to terminate the pregnancy is made with compassion, courage, and honesty. If she carefully considers her physical and emotional wellbeing, reflects on her future, and seeks wise counsel, her choice may be seen as virtuous—even if it involves ending the pregnancy.
-From this view, the focus on emotional maturity, honesty, and responsibility gives a more humane and realistic response than theories like Natural Moral Law, which might forbid abortion even in tragic circumstances
-By encouraging people to reflect on who they are and what kind of life they want to lead, Virtue Ethics can foster moral seriousness and maturity.

Question 5

How could you argue that despite its sensitivity to personal context VE still doesn’t offer a good enough approach to abortion?

Answer 5

-it’s flexibility is also the source of its greatest weakness. Because it depends entirely on the agent’s judgement, Virtue Ethics lacks any objective standard to determine whether abortion is right or wrong in practice
-As Julia Annas notes, “Virtue Ethics cannot resolve moral conflict where virtues seem to clash,” such as compassion for the foetus versus compassion for the mother
-Without a clear rule or guiding principle, two equally virtuous people might reach completely opposite conclusions — both believing they are acting rightly
-Unlike Situation Ethics, which uses agape as a consistent guide, or Natural Moral Law, which upholds fixed precepts like the sanctity of life, Virtue Ethics offers no concrete direction
-In cases like abortion, this leaves the moral weight entirely on the agent, which can be overwhelming and inconsistent

Extra: As Hursthouse herself concedes, the theory “does not provide a moral algorithm,” which can make it impractical in real-life decision-making. A further weakness is that it provides little guidance for legal or medical policy, where clear ethical boundaries are essential

Question 6

How could you argue that VE gives a clearer approach to abortion than NML?

Answer 6

-defenders of Virtue Ethics argue that its focus on moral character and emotional insight allows for a deeper and more human response to abortion
-Rooted in Aristotle’s concept of eudaimonia (flourishing), the theory aims to form people who are just, compassionate, and wise
-Rosalind Hursthouse claims that rather than offering rules, we should ask whether a person seeking abortion is acting in a way consistent with the virtues
-For example, someone may choose abortion because they feel it would be selfish or cowardly to raise a child they cannot care for
-The decision is assessed in terms of what it reveals about moral character, not just consequences. -Supporters argue this avoids simplistic answers and respects the emotional depth of moral life

Question 7

How could you argue that VE gives a clearer approach to abortion than SE?

Answer 7

-defenders of Virtue Ethics argue that its focus on moral character and emotional insight allows for a deeper and more human response to abortion
-Rooted in Aristotle’s concept of eudaimonia (flourishing), the theory aims to form people who are just, compassionate, and wise
-Rosalind Hursthouse claims that rather than offering rules, we should ask whether a person seeking abortion is acting in a way consistent with the virtues
-For example, someone may choose abortion because they feel it would be selfish or cowardly to raise a child they cannot care for
-The decision is assessed in terms of what it reveals about moral character, not just consequences. Supporters argue this avoids simplistic answers and respects the emotional depth of moral life

Question 8

How would VE ethics approach the issue of capital punishment by focusing on character and virtues?

Answer 8

-Virtue Ethics, rooted in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, focuses on developing a good moral character rather than following fixed rules
-The goal is to achieve eudaimonia — human flourishing — through the cultivation of virtues such as justice, courage, and temperance
-A virtuous person does not simply follow laws, but acts in a way that reflects moral excellence
-Applied to capital punishment, Virtue Ethics asks whether supporting or opposing the death penalty reflects the qualities of a virtuous person
-For example, a judge might be praised for showing justice by protecting society from a dangerous criminal, or criticised for lacking compassion if execution seems unnecessarily harsh
-Aristotle stressed that ethical action involves finding the “mean between extremes,” so a virtuous approach would avoid both excessive cruelty and weak leniency

Question 9

How would VE ethics approach the issue of capital punishment by focusing on moral judgement ?

Answer 9

-A key aspect of Virtue Ethics is phronesis — practical wisdom — which enables individuals to make wise and morally balanced decisions in complex situations
-Rather than offering absolute rules, Virtue Ethics encourages thoughtful deliberation based on experience and context
-Rosalind Hursthouse, a modern virtue ethicist, argues that moral agents must ask, “What would a virtuous person do?” when facing moral dilemmas. In the case of capital punishment, this might involve weighing justice and mercy, and considering whether execution reflects a morally admirable character
-However, because the theory does not give a clear answer on whether the death penalty is right or wrong, different individuals could justify opposite decisions based on their interpretation of virtue
-The focus remains on becoming a morally excellent person, rather than following a specific rule about punishment.

Question 10

How could you argue VE ethics does not offer a clear approach to capital punishment?

Answer 10

-One of the main weaknesses of Virtue Ethics is that it provides no fixed rules or clear method for resolving ethical dilemmas
-While a virtuous person is expected to show qualities such as justice, courage, and compassion, the theory does not tell us what to do when those virtues appear to conflict
-For example, a judge might feel that executing a murderer is just, but another may feel compassion for the offender’s potential for reform. Both may claim to be acting virtuously, leading to inconsistent conclusions
-Julia Annas notes that “Virtue theory does not tell us what to do, but what sort of person to be” — a serious limitation when dealing with real-world legal systems that require firm decisions
-In the context of capital punishment, this vagueness makes Virtue Ethics impractical and unclear.

Question 11

How could you argue VE ethics does infact offer a clear approach to capital punishment?

Answer 11

-some defenders of Virtue Ethics argue that the theory’s focus on moral maturity allows for more thoughtful and humane decisions. Aristotle emphasised the importance of phronesis (practical wisdom) — the ability to deliberate well in morally complex situations
-A virtuous person, using phronesis, might support the death penalty if it promotes justice and protects the public, or reject it if it seems to undermine compassion or dignity
-Rosalind Hursthouse suggests that virtues like mercy and justice must be balanced through reflection, not rigid rules
-In this sense, Virtue Ethics allows moral agents to respond flexibly to each case rather than applying a one-size-fits-all judgement

Question 12

How could you argue that despite the fact VE offers more space for moral maturity it is still ultimately a weak approach to capital punishment?

Answer 12

-flexibility is what weakens the theory’s clarity
-Unlike deontological theories such as Natural Moral Law or principle-based systems like Situation Ethics, Virtue Ethics offers no clear guidance on whether capital punishment is ever acceptable
-It leaves too much to personal interpretation and fails to establish a standard that can be applied across society
-In serious matters like the death penalty — where irreversible consequences are involved — moral agents need structured guidance, not just reflection
-The theory’s emphasis on long-term character formation makes it less useful for immediate decisions where justice must be clearly defined and carried out

Question 13

How could you argue that VE gives a better response to capital punishment than NML?

Answer 13

-Supporters of Virtue Ethics argue that its character-based reasoning allows for a more sensitive and humane response to moral dilemmas
-Rooted in Aristotle’s concept of eudaimonia (flourishing) and the cultivation of virtues, the theory focuses on whether capital punishment reflects the traits of a virtuous person — such as justice, compassion, and temperance
-A virtuous agent might support the death penalty if it brings closure or fairness, but equally might reject it if it shows a lack of mercy or respect for life
-Rosalind Hursthouse suggests that moral dilemmas should be approached with phronesis (practical wisdom), which allows people to deliberate thoughtfully about what a good person would do in specific contexts
-For some, this makes Virtue Ethics more morally mature and less coldly procedural than a rule-based approach like NML

Question 14

How would VE approach the issue of theft and lying?

Answer 14

-Virtue Ethics, developed by Aristotle, is an agent-centred theory that focuses on the development of moral character rather than rules or consequences
-Instead of asking “What should I do?” it asks “What kind of person should I be?” Aristotle believed that human beings achieve eudaimonia (flourishing) by developing moral virtues such as honesty, justice, and courage through habit and practice
-Theft and lying are not automatically condemned — their morality depends on whether they reflect or contradict a virtuous life
-For example, lying to cause harm would clearly be a vice, but lying to protect someone from danger might be considered a virtuous act if it aligns with compassion and wisdom.
-There are no strict rules, but the virtuous person is guided by phronesis (practical wisdom), which allows them to judge what is appropriate in each situation

Question 15

How would VE approach the issue of theft and lying by balancing virtues in complex situations?

Answer 15

-Virtue Ethics recognises that ethical decisions are often complex and must consider the full context of a situation
-A virtuous person would typically value truthfulness and fairness, meaning theft and lying would generally be discouraged. However, the theory allows for flexibility when virtues appear to conflict
-For example, someone may feel torn between telling the truth and protecting another’s dignity, or between respecting property and showing generosity
-Aristotle taught that virtue is found in the “golden mean” between extremes — such as being honest without being harsh, or generous without being reckless. While modern virtue ethicists like Rosalind Hursthouse support applying virtues to modern issues, the theory remains focused on building good character rather than issuing universal commands
-This means decisions about lying and theft depend on the agent’s moral development and their judgement in a given situation

Question 16

How could you argue VE does not give clear insight into the issue of theft and lying?

Answer 16

Virtue Ethics does not give a fixed rule about whether lying or stealing is right or wrong; instead, it asks what a virtuous person would do. However, this often leads to ambiguity
-Someone may feel compassion for a starving person and choose to steal, while another may value justice and refuse. Without objective principles, both could claim to act virtuously. Rosalind Hursthouse acknowledges this weakness, stating that Virtue Theory “does not provide a decision procedure
-In urgent moral dilemmas, this makes the theory difficult to apply. Saying that an action must align with traits like honesty or justice offers little practical help when those virtues seem to conflict — such as when lying might protect an innocent life
-Therefore, while the theory is rich in moral language, it does not translate well into action-guidance

Question 17

How could you argue VE gives clear insight into the issue of theft and lying?

Answer 17

Supporters of Virtue Ethics argue that its strength lies in its emphasis on long-term moral development and realistic moral judgement. Aristotle taught that “we become just by doing just acts,” suggesting that morality involves learning how to act well in context
-Rather than following rigid rules, the virtuous person develops phronesis (practical wisdom) to assess what is appropriate in each situation
-From this view, lying or stealing is not judged in isolation but within the broader context of the agent’s intentions and character. The theory encourages people to grow into morally wise individuals who can make thoughtful and compassionate decisions based on experience.

Question 18

How could you argue that despite VE’s emphasis on long-term moral development and realistic moral judgement it still doesn’t offer a good response to theft and lying?

Answer 18

-focus on character does not solve the issue of unclear moral direction. Practical wisdom is vague and difficult to define — especially when applied to public ethics or law, where clear standards are necessary
-Unlike Situation Ethics, which has a consistent principle (agape), or Natural Moral Law, which has fixed precepts, Virtue Ethics can lead to conflicting answers from different agents. One may justify lying as compassionate, another may condemn it as dishonest
-The theory does not provide a reliable way to resolve these disagreements. In high-stakes situations, it offers reflection but not resolution — leaving too much to personal interpretation

Question 19

How could you argue VE gives a better response to theft and lying than SE?

Answer 19

-defenders of Virtue Ethics argue that its focus on developing moral character offers a richer and more realistic understanding of ethics. Aristotle taught that “we are not studying in order to know what virtue is, but to become good,” suggesting that moral life is not about rigid principles but about becoming a person who naturally chooses well
-In situations involving theft or lying, Virtue Ethics encourages reflection on virtues like compassion, justice, and honesty — asking what a virtuous person would do, not merely what produces a good outcome
-Rosalind Hursthouse argues that Virtue Ethics enables us to approach moral issues “with moral seriousness,” emphasising the quality of the agent’s character. From this view, moral growth and emotional maturity are more important than applying one universal rule
-In this way, the theory respects the complexity of ethical life

Question 20

How could you argue VE gives a better response to theft and lying than NML?

Answer 20

-supporters of Virtue Ethics argue that its focus on moral character and emotional intelligence offers a more realistic and compassionate response to theft and lying
-Rooted in Aristotle’s concept of eudaimonia (flourishing), the theory encourages individuals to develop virtues such as honesty, justice, and generosity
-Aristotle taught that “we are not studying in order to know what virtue is, but to become good,” showing that ethical reasoning should lead to moral character, not rigid rule-following
-From this perspective, the morality of lying or stealing depends not on fixed rules but on whether the act reflects a virtuous life
-For example, telling a lie to protect someone from unjust harm may reflect courage or compassion rather than vice
-In this way, Virtue Ethics allows for morally sensitive judgement that adapts to the complexities of human life, avoiding the perceived legalism and detachment of Natural Moral Law

Question 21

What would VE’s response to embryo research be?

Answer 21

Virtue Ethics, rooted in the work of Aristotle, is an agent-centred theory that focuses on the development of good moral character rather than following universal rules. Aristotle believed that humans reach eudaimonia (flourishing) through the cultivation of moral virtues, describing this as “an activity of the soul in accordance with virtue.” -Applied to embryo research and cloning, Virtue Ethics does not provide a fixed answer but asks what a virtuous person would choose
-For example, someone showing the virtue of compassion might support therapeutic cloning if it helps cure disease or alleviate suffering
-At the same time, the agent must exercise phronesis (practical wisdom), considering whether their action is proportionate, responsible, and morally grounded in the wider context of human dignity and wellbeing.

Question 22

What would VE’s response to embryo research be? (Flexibility)

Answer 22

-Virtue Ethics avoids rigid laws and instead encourages moral agents to reflect on whether their choices reflect virtues like justice, humility, or respect for life
-Rosalind Hursthouse, a modern virtue ethicist, applies the theory to bioethics and argues that “we need to ask not just what action is right, but what kind of person we are being in doing it”
-In the case of embryo research or cloning, this means evaluating the agent’s motives and character — for instance, whether the research is driven by compassion and a genuine desire to relieve suffering, or by profit or pride
-While this makes the theory rich and human-centred, it also means it offers no absolute answers. What is morally acceptable depends on how well the agent embodies the virtues in a particular context
-The result is a thoughtful but open-ended approach that focuses more on moral maturity than on prescribing specific actions

Question 23

How could you argue VE does not offer a clear approach to the issue of embryo research and cloning?

Answer 23

-Virtue Ethics asks what a virtuous person would do, but this question offers no clear resolution in dilemmas like embryo research. Different individuals may interpret virtues like compassion or wisdom differently — one might view supporting embryo research as compassionate because it could save lives, while another might see it as unjust because it destroys potential human life
-Rosalind Hursthouse, a modern virtue ethicist, argues that decisions should be shaped by the character of a morally mature person, yet she admits that “virtue theory does not provide a decision procedure”
-This becomes a serious limitation in bioethics, where medical professionals and lawmakers often need precise, consistent guidance
-The theory also offers little clarity on when life begins or whether embryos have moral status, which is central to the debate on embryo destruction
-Without fixed principles or clear boundaries, Virtue Ethics risks becoming too vague to be useful in policy or clinical settings

Question 24

How could you argue VE does infact offer a clear approach to the issue of embryo research and cloning?

Answer 24

-Supporters of Virtue Ethics might argue that it offers a more human-centred and emotionally intelligent approach
-Aristotle taught that ethics should reflect the complexity of real life and that practical wisdom (phronesis) allows moral agents to balance competing virtues depending on the context
-This means someone considering cloning or embryo research would reflect deeply on their motives and the potential impact on human flourishing. The theory also avoids rigid prohibitions, allowing for compassionate decisions that are rooted in the agent’s character rather than rules
-From this view, Virtue Ethics is morally rich and adaptable, which some see as more realistic in the face of ethical grey areas in medicine and research

Question 25

How could you argue that despite VE’s more human centred approach it still doesn’t offer a clear response to the issue of embryo research and cloning?

Answer 25

-emphasis on character over action creates serious problems in practice. While phronesis sounds valuable in theory, it is difficult to apply consistently — especially in public decision-making, where clarity is needed -Julia Annas points out that Virtue Ethics “tells us what sort of person to be, not what to do.” This leaves the theory open to interpretation and disagreement, especially in issues like cloning, where moral intuitions vary widely -Without clear criteria, Virtue Ethics cannot reliably tell us whether therapeutic cloning is permissible, or whether using embryos for research is morally justified -It may help us reflect, but it does not guide us with certainty — a serious flaw in an area where human lives and dignity are at stake.

Question 26

How could you argue VE gives a better approach to embryo research and cloning than NML?

Answer 26

-Supporters of Virtue Ethics argue that its emphasis on phronesis (practical wisdom) and character allows for a more nuanced and compassionate response to these issues -Aristotle taught that ethical decisions require understanding of the situation and the development of virtues such as compassion, courage, and justice -A person who has cultivated these virtues may support embryo research if it reflects compassion and the desire to save lives. Rosalind Hursthouse claims that Virtue Ethics encourages agents to assess whether a choice is in line with a virtuous character, rather than follow strict rules -In this way, the theory allows individuals to balance scientific progress and moral responsibility without rigid restrictions

Question 27

How could you argue VE gives a better approach to embryo research and cloning than SE?

Answer 27

-Supporters of Virtue Ethics argue that it offers a morally richer, more human-centred approach to issues like embryo research -Rooted in Aristotle’s concept of eudaimonia and the cultivation of virtues, Virtue Ethics encourages agents to act in ways that reflect compassion, justice, and wisdom. Rosalind Hursthouse has applied Virtue Ethics to bioethics and argues that a truly virtuous person would take into account the emotional weight of embryo destruction and cloning -She suggests that the right action is the one a virtuous person would choose, guided by phronesis (practical wisdom) -This allows for sensitivity and context, which some argue is more morally serious than Situation Ethics’ focus on outcomes alone. The theory promotes integrity and moral depth by helping individuals grow into thoughtful,compassionate people

Question 28

How would VE approach the issue of euthanasia and assisted suicide?

Answer 28

-From a virtue-ethical standpoint, the moral permissibility of euthanasia or assisted dying hinges on whether the decision expresses and promotes the virtues necessary for human flourishing -Aristotle’s notion of eudaimonia (flourishing) requires practitioners to act with practical wisdom (phronesis) and compassion—virtues cultivated through habituation and reflection -A virtuous physician, guided by phronesis, would carefully discern whether assisting death truly responds to a patient’s unbearable suffering in a way that honors the patient’s dignity -Compassion motivates easing pain, but must be balanced by prudence so that the act genuinely contributes to the patient’s overall well-being rather than simply terminating life for convenience -virtue ethics neither unconditionally endorses nor rejects euthanasia; it demands a character-centered assessment of each case, where the virtues of compassion and practical wisdom jointly determine the right course of action

Question 29

How does VE also caution that participating in intentionally ending a life can undermine core medical and moral virtues?

Answer 29

-Conversely, virtue ethics also cautions that participating in intentionally ending a life can undermine core medical and moral virtues, such as respectfulness and integrity -The medical profession prizes virtues like beneficence (act for the patient’s good), non-maleficence (do no harm), and fidelity (faithfulness to the healing role), all of which can be eroded if life-ending measures become normalised -A physician’s commitment to healing shapes trust; if assisting death becomes routine, it risks corroding the virtue of integrity—patients may fear that their lives are undervalued or that suffering is too readily “fixed” by death -Moreover, habitual recourse to euthanasia could blunt the development of other virtues, such as patience and perseverance in palliative care -Therefore, a virtue-ethical approach fosters deep reflection on whether euthanasia truly manifests virtuous motives or instead signals a fail­ing of the character traits essential to compassionate, life-affirming medical practice

Question 30

How could you argue VE does not give a clear approach to the issue of euthanasia and assisted dying?

Answer 30

-A key weakness of Virtue Ethics is that it does not tell us what to do in specific moral dilemmas — especially when virtues seem to conflict. In the case of Tony Nicklinson, who was paralysed and wanted legal permission to die, one person may act on compassion and support euthanasia, while another may feel that endurance and respect for life require refusing -This shows how Virtue Ethics can lead to conflicting conclusions. Rosalind Hursthouse admits that the theory “does not provide a decision procedure,” meaning it gives no clear action-guidance in life-and-death scenarios. In high-stakes decisions like these, uncertainty is not helpful — and Virtue Ethics becomes too vague to be reliable

Question 31

How could you argue VE does infact give a clear approach to the issue of euthanasia and assisted dying?

Answer 31

-supporters of Virtue Ethics argue that it allows for personal, thoughtful judgement, guided by phronesis — practical wisdom -A moral agent can consider the circumstances and decide whether euthanasia aligns with compassion and dignity -For example, in a case like Diane Pretty, who suffered from motor neurone disease, a virtue ethicist might recognise that helping her die could reflect true human empathy. Aristotle taught that “the good for man is an activity of the soul in accordance with virtue,” meaning actions are right when they reflect good character -From this view, the focus on motivation and moral growth may make Virtue Ethics more deeply ethical than rule-based alternatives

Question 32

How could you argue that despite VE’s personal approach to euthanasia it is still weak?

Answer 32

-while this emphasis on virtue sounds morally rich, it leaves too much room for disagreement. Two people could both act from virtue and reach opposing decisions, with no way to judge which is right -The concept of eudaimonia encourages long-term flourishing, not guidance for urgent moral action. In contrast, Situation Ethics asks one clear question — what is the most loving thing to do? — and applies it consistently -Fletcher’s theory offers a principle (agape) that makes euthanasia permissible if it relieves suffering out of love. Virtue Ethics, by contrast, may support either side and leave patients or doctors with no clear ethical direction

Question 33

How could you argue VE gives a better approach to euthanasia than SE?

Answer 33

-some argue that Virtue Ethics, with its focus on moral character, offers a richer moral framework. Inspired by Aristotle, Virtue Ethics encourages the development of virtues such as compassion, courage, and justice, and assesses morality based on what a good person would do -Rosalind Hursthouse argues that we should ask, “What would a virtuous person do in this situation?” From this perspective, a person motivated by true compassion might help someone end their life if continued suffering causes unnecessary harm -Virtue Ethics also values practical wisdom (phronesis), which allows agents to navigate complex moral terrain through thoughtful deliberation rather than rule-following -Supporters claim that this encourages a deeper understanding of what it means to act ethically, beyond simply following consequences or emotional instinct

Question 34

How could you argue VE gives a better approach to euthanasia than NML?

Answer 34

-Supporters of Virtue Ethics argue that it allows for personal, thoughtful judgement, guided by phronesis — practical wisdom -A moral agent can consider the circumstances and decide whether euthanasia aligns with compassion and dignity -For example, in a case like Diane Pretty, who suffered from motor neurone disease, a virtue ethicist might recognise that helping her die could reflect true human empathy. Aristotle taught that “the good for man is an activity of the soul in accordance with virtue,” meaning actions are right when they reflect good character -From this view, the focus on motivation and moral growth may make Virtue Ethics more deeply ethical than rule-based alternatives.