3.2.1 - Aristotle - responsibility, practical wisdom and issues
Virtue ethics must connect good character to responsible choice and right action. You will examine voluntary action and practical wisdom, then test whether the approach can guide action, resolve virtue conflicts and avoid circular explanations of flourishing.
The Problem Of Character And Action
Virtue ethics can sound attractive because it asks a deep moral question: what sort of person should I become? That question matters because moral life is not only a sequence of isolated choices. A person's honesty, courage, generosity, resentment, cowardice, and sensitivity to others shape how they notice situations and why they act.
The pressure point is this: AQA still expects a theory of morality to explain actions. It must say enough about responsibility, reasons, right action, wrong action, and moral guidance. If virtue ethics concentrates on character, can it still tell us what to do?
Aristotelian virtue ethics answers by connecting four ideas:
| Idea | Role in the theory |
|---|---|
| Eudaimonia | The final human good: living and faring well over a whole life. |
| Virtue | A stable excellence of character, such as courage or justice, involving appropriate feeling, choice, and action. |
| Practical wisdom | Good deliberation about what is worth doing in particular circumstances. |
| Responsibility | The condition under which praise, blame, correction, and character assessment are fair. |
Julia Annas is useful here because she presents virtue ethics as a structured ethical theory, not a loose admiration of nice traits. On this approach, a virtue is not merely a behaviour pattern. It is a settled way of perceiving, feeling, reasoning, choosing, and acting well. That is why action, reason, and character cannot be pulled apart.
The central question is:
Can Aristotelian virtue ethics explain right and wrong action by appeal to virtuous character and practical wisdom?
The positive answer is that the virtuous person acts from stable character, for the right reasons, with practical wisdom. The critical worry is that this may become unclear, circular, or too dependent on an ideal person whose judgement ordinary agents cannot easily copy.
Responsibility And Voluntariness
Aristotle's account of responsibility matters because virtue ethics evaluates character through action. If someone acts under force or ignorance, their action may not reveal their character in the normal way.
AQA names three categories.
| Type of action | What it means | Responsibility point |
|---|---|---|
| Voluntary action | The action's source is in the agent, and the agent knows the relevant particulars of what they are doing. | Praise and blame normally apply. |
| Involuntary action | The action is strictly compelled from outside, with the agent contributing nothing; alternatively it is done through ignorance of relevant particulars and followed by regret or pain on learning what happened. | The missing control or knowledge gives grounds for pardon or pity. |
| Non-voluntary action | The action is done through ignorance, but the agent does not show regret or distress afterwards. | It is not fully voluntary, but it is harder to treat as excusing in the same way as involuntary action. |
This distinction is not just legal bookkeeping. It shows how virtue ethics links action to moral character. If a normally generous person knocks someone over because they were pushed, the act does not show ungenerosity. If a person knowingly humiliates someone for amusement, the act reveals something morally important about their character and reasons.
Regret distinguishes involuntary from non-voluntary action done through ignorance; it is not an additional condition for an externally forced bodily event. Ignorance of moral principles or ignorance caused by culpable drunkenness is not automatically excusing ignorance of particulars. Aristotle also allows for difficult mixed cases. Suppose a sailor throws cargo overboard in a storm to save the crew. In the abstract, nobody wants to lose the cargo. In the actual circumstances, the action originates in the sailor and is chosen knowingly as the least bad option, so it is voluntary in those circumstances even though unwanted in itself. That is why responsibility has to consider what the agent knew, what pressures were present, and what reasons guided the choice.
Responsibility argument:
1. P1: Character is assessed through actions, choices, feelings, and reasons.
2. P2: Some actions do not properly express the agent's character because they are compelled or based on excusing ignorance.
3. P3: Praise and blame are fair only when the action sufficiently belongs to the agent.
4. Therefore, C: Virtue ethics needs a distinction between voluntary, involuntary, and non-voluntary action.
Hidden assumption: Moral assessment should track what the agent could reasonably know and control.
Inference type: Practical and conceptual reasoning.
Main pressure point: Mixed cases, where there is pressure or ignorance but also some agency.
This gives virtue ethics a more careful account of moral responsibility than the simple claim that "good people do good things". The theory asks whether the action genuinely expresses the agent's character and practical reasoning.
Virtues Actions And Reasons
Virtue ethics is sometimes misread as if it says: first become virtuous, then whatever you do is right. Aristotle's view is tighter than that. Virtues are stable dispositions to feel and act well, but they are also connected to reasons.
A virtuous action has at least three layers:
| Layer | What must be right |
|---|---|
| Outer action | The person does the kind of thing that fits the situation, such as telling the truth, standing firm, giving help, or refusing an unjust demand. |
| Inner orientation | The action is chosen knowingly and not merely by accident, fear, social pressure, or desire for praise. |
| Reason and feeling | The agent acts for the right sort of reason and with emotions trained to respond appropriately. |
For example, two people may both tell the truth. One tells it because honesty and respect require it. The other tells it to humiliate someone. The external act is similar, but the moral quality differs because the reason and emotional orientation differ.
This is why Aristotle's doctrine of the mean is not a mechanical middle amount. Courage is not halfway between running away and reckless aggression. It is the disposition to respond to danger in the right way, at the right time, towards the right objects, for the right reasons. Sometimes courage requires speaking; sometimes silence; sometimes endurance; sometimes withdrawal. The mean is relative to the agent and situation, not a numerical average.
Relationship argument:
1. P1: A virtue is a stable excellence of character involving choice, feeling, and action.
2. P2: Actions express character only when they are chosen for reasons the agent recognises.
3. P3: The same outward behaviour can express different characters if done for different reasons.
4. Therefore, C: Virtue ethics must assess virtues, actions, and reasons together.
Hidden assumption: Moral evaluation concerns the quality of agency, not only the outward event produced.
Inference type: Conceptual and practical reasoning.
Main pressure point: Whether this gives enough public guidance to someone who is not already virtuous.
Annas helps here because her account of virtue ethics stresses the internal structure of virtue: virtue involves practical reasoning and emotion, not only repeated behaviour. The skill analogy is useful but limited. Like a skilled craftsperson, the virtuous person improves through practice and learns to see what matters. Unlike a purely technical skill, virtue is directed at living well as a whole person, not at producing a separable product.
Practical Wisdom And Guidance
Practical wisdom (phronesis)
The intellectual virtue of deliberating well about human goods and about what to do in particular circumstances.
It is not the same as cleverness. A clever person can work out efficient means to a bad end. A practically wise person has a trained grasp of good ends and of the details that matter in this situation.
Practical wisdom has three jobs in Aristotelian virtue ethics.
| Job | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| It reads particulars | Moral life depends on details: who is involved, what harm is at stake, what was promised, what the relationship is, and what alternatives exist. |
| It connects means to ends | The agent must work out which action will express virtue here and now. |
| It integrates virtues | It helps courage, honesty, generosity, justice, and other virtues work together rather than operate as isolated impulses. |
This is Aristotle's link between virtuous character and right action. Character gives the agent good ends and stable emotional tendencies. Practical wisdom judges what those ends require in the actual case.
Practical wisdom argument:
1. P1: Right action depends on particular circumstances, not only on abstract rules.
2. P2: Virtuous character supplies good ends, but good ends still need intelligent application.
3. P3: Practical wisdom is the capacity to deliberate well about achievable human goods in particular cases.
4. Therefore, C: Practical wisdom links virtuous character to right action.
Hidden assumption: Moral judgement requires perception of morally relevant particulars.
Inference type: Practical reasoning.
Main pressure point: If practical wisdom is needed before one can know what to do, beginners may lack guidance.
The major objection is lack of action guidance.
| Objection chain | Analysis |
|---|---|
| Objection | Virtue ethics does not give a clear decision procedure like maximise utility or test a maxim. |
| Target | The theory's practical usefulness and account of right action. |
| Force | If it cannot guide action before someone is already virtuous, it seems incomplete as a normative theory. |
| Reply | Virtue ethics can guide through named virtues and vices, moral education, exemplars, attention to particulars, and general constraints. Aristotle also says some actions, such as murder or theft, do not admit of a virtuous mean. |
| Residual issue | The reply gives patterns of judgement rather than an algorithm. Critics may say that is still too vague in urgent or unfamiliar cases. |
The evaluative judgement should be balanced. If "guidance" means a fixed rule that settles every case, virtue ethics is weaker than it first appears. If "guidance" means training a person to notice what matters and act for good reasons, virtue ethics may be more realistic than theories that pretend moral life can be reduced to a formula.
Continue this lesson.
You’re previewing NovaLearn without an account. Create a free account to read the rest.
Create free account