Personal Identity And Virtue Ethics

Front 1

How does one determine virtuosity within personal identity?

Back 1

Virtue ethicists argue that character traits "flow from a person's character", in that an action involving the trait would have to be a "natural" and spontaneous reaction for the person.
If one, without thinking, gives money to the homeless man, he can be seen as generous. However, if the man tells everyone of his grand act of generosity, it shows the trait does not exist, as he is too self-conscious of the consequences of his actions. Hume calls these "monkish virtues", as significant thought or praise for an action takes away the presence of the supposed virtue.
However, Aristotle argues that to be virtuous, one also needs to understand virtuosity of one's actions. Here lies the problem how much self-consciousness is necessary for virtue. Too little, and you are being wholly ignorant of your actions. Too much, and you are undermining the engrained nature of the character trait.
Besides this issue, Nietzsche introduces the idea that Aristotle's "unity of the virtues" (virtues all coexist to create virtuosity) is incorrect, as some virtues naturally contradict each other. This leads to the idea that we have multiple identities, all dependent on the context of the situation. One might normally be extremely kind, but in an entirely different setting, one might be abhorrently cruel, thus two different identities exist. This belief prevents the problem of reconciling actions or characteristics in the last moments of life with those done in the bulk of life, as it can just be explained as two different identities.