The Three Ethical Philosophies In a given scenario, four Navy Seals are embroiled in a dangerous mission. Nearby, a village held captive by over one hundred and forty hostiles awaits rescue by the Seals. However, before the Seals can carry out their mission, they are compromised by two goat farmers and a teenage boy. With no rope to secure the innocent farmers, and no guarantee that the men will not compromise the entire mission, the Seals are faced with a dilemma. Do they kill the innocent farmers, and the boy, in order to secure the mission, or do they allow the innocents to go free, risking the lives of the soldiers and villagers alike? Three very different views on philosophy, the Utilitarian, Kantian, and Virtue all have their own, sharply independent answers to this question.
…show more content…
In the study of virtue ethics, one is concerned with the values of a person. Character traits that are virtuous are highly prized, and are considered the most desirable of traits to possess. However, before these traits can be considered traits, they must become habitual. Aristotle believed that only once a man was practiced in his virtues could they truly be called “his” virtues (Soccio 172). Once these virtues are cemented, one can explore the philosophy behind relying on virtues to make ethical decisions. In the eyes of a virtue ethicist, one should “do what is right” (Contreras). Assuming that all humans have a series of habitual and good virtues instilled within them, they will be able to know that the right action will be. In theory, this appears to be rather logical. Conversely, in reality, the idea of simply doing what is right becomes difficult. What is right for one man might be very wrong for another, considering which virtues each man carries with him. The virtue ethicist cannot give a complete and succinct answer to this conundrum. He can only instruct the men to do what is right, and no
In the study of virtue ethics, one is concerned with the values of a person. Character traits that are virtuous are highly prized, and are considered the most desirable of traits to possess. However, before these traits can be considered traits, they must become habitual. Aristotle believed that only once a man was practiced in his virtues could they truly be called “his” virtues (Soccio 172). Once these virtues are cemented, one can explore the philosophy behind relying on virtues to make ethical decisions. In the eyes of a virtue ethicist, one should “do what is right” (Contreras). Assuming that all humans have a series of habitual and good virtues instilled within them, they will be able to know that the right action will be. In theory, this appears to be rather logical. Conversely, in reality, the idea of simply doing what is right becomes difficult. What is right for one man might be very wrong for another, considering which virtues each man carries with him. The virtue ethicist cannot give a complete and succinct answer to this conundrum. He can only instruct the men to do what is right, and no