Theories Of Virtue

Modern day philosophers tend to begin crafting their theories around the question of, what is the right thing to do? By doing so, theories they create are fundamentally different than those created by ancient philosophers whom began by asking, which traits make one an ethical person? With ancient and modern philosophers beginning their theories with different questions, the theories they develop vary. Modern philosophers have developed theories such as the Social Contract and Utilitarianism, which others declare to be bankrupt. These thinkers believe that philosophers should return to a form of thinking similar to that of Aristotle, who believed that a Theory of Virtues should dominate philosophy. Theories of virtue have roots in different …show more content…
E. M. Anscombe who suggested that modern philosophical thought is the same as a “law without a lawgiver”, first offered the notion of returning to a belief centered on Aristotle’s ideas. Anscombe stated that philosophers who believed in concepts that link to a fictitious creation were making a fundamental mistake, and that virtues should take center stage. Virtue is defined as, “a trait of character, manifested in habitual action that is good for one person to have.” When examining this definition using the same line of thinking as G. E. M. Anscombe, one draws a similar conclusion about virtue. Virtues that have been deemed necessary or valuable to possess have been assigned a judgment without a proper judge. Supporters of the theories of virtue will state that the proper judge of virtue can be a person. Why then would they refute the fact that the lawgiver in the case of a law is the entity which all of those who obey the law …show more content…
However, when calling on the example of the Nazi soldier from the beginning of the chapter, it could be said that most of the Nazi regime were seen to have possessed the virtues that were seen as necessities in the eyes of their society. What made them different were a few misconceptions about the world and their place in it. Yet there is no one who would argue that the Nazi party as a whole was virtuous in any sense. It is evident that the commonalities in this case made very little difference, and in reality it was the nature of the differences that should render the decision of whether someone or something is virtuous. Another modern example of this is seen through the virtue of justice around the world. In Middle Eastern countries severity of punishments for crime is much harsher than western nations, making the average western citizen believe there to be no virtue in people who carry out such