Virtue Ethics versus Utilitarianism - Report Example

Virtue ethics vs. utilitarianism Individuals around the world wish to have an ethical life, but it may not be simpleto adhere to the ethics if one knows what it really means. As a result of the difficulties human beings encounter to live an ethical life, then, beings are facing “ethical dilemma”. In some instances, there are two ideas but contrasting however they seem to be ethical, although it is not easy to identify which of the two is the correct course of action. There are some frequent ethical dilemmas which have minor consequence: for instance, is it right to tell a fib when an individual ask if they are fat or if their poorly cooked food is delicious? It is an ethical dilemma, to identify which of the two is ethical; being unkind or lying. On the other hand it is also complex if it is ethical or unethical for an individual to steal from the rich with an aim of helping the poor. Ethics is both what an individual studies and thinks or the code that an individual follows and lives in that direction. In this paper I will argue that utilitarianism is the better form of ethics than virtue ethics.... Virtue ethics is a description of character as a moral agent, character is an ethical behavior driving force. It does not depend on rules or a consequence which defines what is right and wrong depending with the results of an act rather than character (Crisp, 68). While utilitarianism on the other hand, is an idea based on the moral worth of a specific action relaying on its usefulness as it maximizes on utility and minimizes on utility which is negative(Scarre, 2). Utility is defined as pleasure without pain, satisfaction that is preference or knowledge. Utilitarianism is therefore a form of consequentialism; moral worth of a specific action depends on the outcome. Compared to virtue ethics where individuals are expected to relay on the societal norms or religion which is not the case usually because human beings are forced to live a life full of presidency. Utilitarianism is one of the most relevant approaches of ethical consequences. An approach which is consequential argues that individuals ought to act in a manner that will result to positive outcomes from their action. Depending on this kind of approach therefore it does not matter on the kind of acts human beings are involved in, or the intentions of individuals in an action, as long as the outcomes are positive. The consequential approach makes sense to us intuitively since while growing up, most children are usually taught on how they should be good. In this context the young are usually advice on how they should carry themselves and since human beings are mostly govern by there conscious they are in a position to make a decision based on the action that will not hate the other party (Lafollette, 27). In addition, utilitarianism relays on two main principles, one being equality; that is an individual considers everyone’s interests counts by having the same weight and relevancy. It does not discriminate race since everyone’s frustrations or pain has the same magnitude as anyone else. While the second principle relies on the action of an individual, the act has to result to a balance which is best between an individual frustrations and satisfaction, as well as to all human beings affected by the results of the action. It is the best form of ethic since as a utilitarian; one has to think critically about a specific approach in a moral way. Here, an individual has to evaluate by first finding out the impacts of a specific approach. As a utilitarian one has to know who will be affected by choosing one of the two existing options. In addition, one has to determine the strength of the impact of the approach as well as where the best results will lie. It does not matter what option one has to take but it matters if the selected option is defines the moral duties (Lafollette, 27). On the other hand, Utilitarianism focuses on the idea of being kind and it is ethical for human beings to act this way. Being kind to individuals around as is a contribution to our own happiness compared to the physical pleasure we seek for such as the eating or sex caviar. Furthermore, it helps human beings to develop characters which are excellent within themselves without struggling with monitoring and developing character based on the virtues theories. It also helps individual to achieve complete happiness which is more of achieving experiences which are pleasant and absent of painfully ones, and it has varying specific accounts. On this approach, the fully satisfaction of individual preferences is centralized in the utilitarian theory which is ethical. Utility does not only embrace mere satisfaction of individuals but also the intrinsic goods such as knowledge and beauty, hence it is said to be an ideal utilitarianism (Scarre, 3) However, the acts utilitarianism depends on outcome of a specific action to determine whether it is right or wrong. Hence, it has no moral rules apart from one, which is seeking greatest happiness always to greatest levels in all circumstances. Therefore, it has its own weakness such as one is not able to predict the incoming consequences for them to choose a specific action to take. Pleasure can not be defined and there is no defense that exists for the minority in the society. On the other hand, an individual cannot calculate the morality of every action. Looking at the rules of utilitarianism, they are formed for the societal benefits and the staunch utilitarian individuals believe that the rules should be adhered to, which is contrasting to the weak utilitarian individuals who agree with the guidelines but should not be adhered to always. However, they do support the notion that individual well being is generally perfect and it also supports Jesus’ call of treating your neighbor as you would wish to be treated. It goes further to encourage democracy and that consequences affect life but not once motive (Callinicos, 129). Virtue theory on the other hand relays on the manner in which moral dilemmas are handled than how the conclusion of the moral are reached. For instance, the consequntialists may note that lying is wrong as a result of the consequences lying may bring, however they can be able to see that the consequences can make an action like lying to be acceptable in some instances. In a world full of actions that are never inline with the virtue that individuals are expected to observe, by relaying on the theory is not only for the few and however, they are not always observing the virtue that they claim to have glued themselves to. Furthermore, a deontologist may remain firm that lying is always wrong in spite of the good things it may bring forth. An ethicist of virtue however, will give less attention to the action of lying in a specific situation, but concentrate on the decision of telling a lie since such action to them describes once behavior and character as well. The across the globe it has been found that human race cannot can not adhere to the theory of virtue (Swanton, 3). However, in spite of virtue not being one of the most admirable ethical approaches, it does create room for partiality. It allows individuals to uphold loyalty their friends since one considers the situation and the circumstances that come with their action even if they are deprived from achieving their goals. Since an individual considers the right environment as well as an appropriate degree of action. It also allows an individual to adopt attractive qualities that come without struggling. Looking at virtue critically it depicts feminists by restoring the focus of an individual as well as the humanity that the society expects to see. As a theory it guides as on how people are expected to demonstrate them selves but it hinders greatness. Furthermore, Christians believe that there are consequences that an individual has to pay for in line with the specific action and the magnitude is usually direct to the course of action (Kovta, 3). I therefore hold that, adhering to the rule and act of utilitarianism is the way most human race should follow, since putting in mind everyone interest should have the same magnitude towards considering the kinds of decisions we make. This will not only foster good relationship within the society but also empowers democracy within countries. However, it is important to note that utilitarianism as a rule and an act is unacceptable moral in the Christian world; virtue is what the Christian world allows its believers to uphold in their daily life. Work Cited Callinicos, Alex. Making history: agency, structure, and change in social theory. BRILL, 2004 Crisp, Roger. Routledge philosophy guidebook to Mill on utilitarianism. Routledge, 1997 Lafollette, Hugh. The Blackwell guide to ethical theory. Wiley-Blackwell, 2000 Lafollette, Hugh. Ethics in practice: an anthology. Wiley-Blackwell, 2002 Kovta, J. Joseph. The Christian Case for Virtue Ethics. Georgetown University Press, 1997 Scarre, Geoffrey. Utilitarianism. Routledge, 1996 Read More