Scheidell 1

Stephen Scheidell
Ethical Theory
20 January 2011
Reflection 1
Although Baron brought important nuances of Kants ethics into focus! her
treatment of "irtue ethics raise red flags# $n her contrasting bet%een deontological and
"irtue ethics! a paper tiger seemed at play# T%o aspects of the criti&ue can gi"e this
impression# 'irst! the claim that "irtue ethicists in general %ant to see no conflict
bet%een desire and "irtuous beha"ior seems to e(clude certain "irtues from the
con"ersation# Second! the consideration of )eudaimonia* or +flourishing, for
Aristotles "ersion of "irtue ethics %as difficult to find- $n fact! this reader did not find it at
all# .hat follo%s %ill e(pand these points respecti"ely#
/o% suppose "irtue ethics to say that the "irtuous person feels no impulse
contrary to "irtuous beha"ior as Baron suggests )Three Methods of Ethics p# 00*# Baron
did not attribute this "ie% to Aristotle# $nstead! she attributed to anonymous "irtue
ethicists# $s this politics in %hich %e debate anonymous opponents ma1ing up their
positions for them or philosophy %here %e clearly indicate precisely %ho it is %ith %hich
%e disagree2 Pardon me, waiter, may I see a citation !ease"
.hat! then! becomes of self3control or! to offer another e(ample! determination2
4an %e attribute any "alue to self3restraint if one has nothing from %hich to e(ercise
restraint2 The poignancy and %orth of these and similar "irtues seem predicated on the
possibility of interests being in conflict# $t is absurd on the face of it to call "icious the
one %ho sho%s great self3restraint and a desire to be "irtuous# 5ranted! %e might ha"e
more admiration for the person %ho is less di"ided regarding ones "irtue# 6o%e"er! the
human condition permits one to safely say that any gi"en person %ill! at some point!
e(perience a conflict of interests# The notion of an apathetic automaton )I#id* sounds
hopelessly unrealistic and a useless standard in the present state of affairs# $t may be
held as a goal to %hich the "irtuous person stri"es! al%ays a%are that perfect
achie"ement of it cannot be reasonably e(pected#
Secondly! for "irtue ethics! the goal %as ne"er simply hitting an Aristotelian mean
)I#id*! but eudaimonia# The absence of this term regarding Aristotelian notions of "irtue
Scheidell 2
is "ery disconcerting# This is especially %orrying %hen the %ord appears in the second
sentence of the .i1ipedia article on Aristotelian Ethics# Baron recogni7es that Aristotle
thought of "irtue as more than a pleasant temperament! but she attributes the position
to! again unnamed! "irtue ethicists )I#id 01*#
$n short! Baron sho%s that nuanced deontological ethics are superior to na8"e!
simplistic "irtue ethics that pay little attention to Aristotle# .hat! then! of a critically
de"eloped "irtue ethic2