The main difference between merit ethics utilitarianism is that virtue ethics focuses on the person carrying out an action, whereas utilitarianism focuses on the consequences of the action .
Virtue ethics and utilitarianism are moral and ethical theories that have the ability to determine the correctness or wrongness of an action. Virtue ethics is a moral theory that is concerned with the moral character or good of the individual carrying out an act while utilitarianism is the moral theory that states an action is correct if it is useful or is beneficial for a majority .
Key Areas Covered
1. What is Virtue Ethics – Definition, Characteristics, Focus
2. What is Utilitarianism
– Definition, Characteristics, Focus3. Difference Between Virtue Ethics and Utilitarianism
– Comparison of Key Differences
Bạn đang đọc: Difference Between Virtue Ethics and Utilitarianism
Key Terms
Ethics, Morals, Utiliniarism, Virtue Ethics
What is Virtue Ethics?
Virtue ethics is a normative ethical hypothesis that is based on character, quite than action. The theory emphasizes virtues of beware, character and smell of honesty. In virtue ethics, a right act is an act that is carried out by a virtuous person. In simple words, virtues ethics looks at the moral character or virtue of a character of the person carrying out an military action, alternatively of the action itself, or the consequences of an natural process. frankincense, this theory deals with the appropriateness or inappropriateness of individual actions and describes the characteristics and behaviours a pure or beneficial person will seek to achieve. In brief, virtue ethics urge people to live a moral life by practice pure habits . According to many virtue theorists, all homo beings would benefit from a coarse sic of virtues. discretion, justice, fortitude/bravery and temperance were the traditional list of cardinal virtues. however, there is no general agreement on what virtues are ; in fact, some virtues may be relative to a person ’ randomness culture and company .
furthermore, virtue ethics is a very utilitarian theory since most people are often interested in assessing the moral character of individuals rather than assessing the rightness or incorrectness of a particular action. however, it is besides important to note that although virtue ethics provide general steering on how to become a pure person, it does not specify actions to take in moral dilemma .
See also Crestor vs. Lipitor: which is better for me?
What is Utilitarianism?
utilitarianism is a moral theory that focuses on the consequences of one ’ second actions rather than one ’ second captive. According to this hypothesis, an legal action is right, if it tends to promote happiness – not good the happiness of the person who performs the carry through, but all those who are affected by that action. similarly, an military action is bad if it produces the opposition of happiness. therefore, a effective military action in utilitarianism is equal an action with dependable consequences. basically, this theory is based on the concept that actions should be measured in terms of pleasure or happiness that produce. In abbreviated, utilitarianists believe that we should act always thus as to produce the greatest adept for the greatest number. thus, this is what we call the principle of utility.
Xem thêm: Difference between Primary and Secondary Memory Storage
furthermore, this hypothesis stems from the concepts of late 18th and 19th-century English philosophers, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. Besides, there are two main theories of utilitarianism as act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. Act utilitarianism states that the ethical motive of an carry through is determined by its utility to people. Rule utilitarianism states that an action can be morally mighty if it conforms to the rules that will lead to the greatest commodity or happiness .
See also The Difference Between ObamaCare and TrumpCare
Definition
Virtue ethics is a moral theory that is concerned with the moral character or good of the individual carrying out an action while utilitarianism is the moral theory that states an carry through is right if it is useful or is beneficial for a majority .
Focus
Virtue ethics focuses on the person carrying out an action, whereas utilitarianism focuses on the consequences of the action .
Rightness or Wrongness of an Action
In virtue ethics, a veracious act or a good act is an act that is carried out by a virtuous person ; in utilitarianism, a mighty act is an act that brings the greatest dear for the greatest number of people .
Conclusion
Virtue ethics is a moral theory that is concerned with the moral character or good of the individual carrying out an act while utilitarianism is the moral hypothesis that states an military action is right if it is utilitarian or is beneficial for a majority. The main dispute between virtue ethics utilitarianism is that virtue ethics focuses on the person carrying out an action, whereas utilitarianism focuses on the consequences of the action.
Reference: 1. “ Ethics – Introduction to Ethics : Virtue Ethics. ” BBC, Available here.
2. West, Harry R. “ Utilitarianism. ” Utilitarianism, Available here .
1. “ 947574 ” ( CC0 ) via Pixabay
source : //livingcorner.com.au
Category : What is?
Ethics forms a vast area of philosophy that fills libraries, and the following discussion should not be seen as comprehensive by newcomers to the field but as an overview of three broad categories of commonly discussed ethics known as virtue, utilitarianism, and deontological ethics. These ethical approaches provide different perspectives for determining behavior, with each system providing coherent methods and critical issues.
Virtue Ethics
Virtue Ethics, sometimes called “character ethics,” derives from Aristotle and Plato’s teachings, although it can also be traced independently in Eastern philosophy through Confucius and Mencius (Hursthouse & Pettigrove, 2018). According to Aristotle, the development of ethics is synonymous with the development of character and virtue but this understanding of virtue complicates in an assumption of virtue being a form of innate character trait or thoughts which compel the person to act generous, helpful, heroic, or in some other virtuous manner. As such a person who is generous might not be virtuous if she is generous because it is considered the proper social custom. In contrast, the virtuous person would be generous because she feels generous, denoting the innateness of virtue ethics. Aristotle refers to this innate virtue as “natural virtue” and failing to achieve natural virtue can occur in a variety of ways such as hypocrisy, intention, and even inexperience such as youth (Hursthouse & Pettigrove, 2018).
Virtue ethics divides into various forms (outside the scope of this overview) that focus on how the “sense” of right and wrong or virtue determines proper behavior, which opens the door to controversies of application as well as the extent to which virtue remains fixed by nature. All forms of virtue ethics assume there exist right and wrong actions, which give rise to even more problems concerning cultural and individual determinations of right and wrong. Is there a trait of generosity, and is it universal to all cultures? Are people born with less or more degrees of virtue traits than others? How do we apply such an inward-focused ethic? Questions such as this don’t discount virtue ethics, and many arguments answer them, but they do hint at practical application problems and whether a person is born into or with character traits that may or may not be virtuous, which may fix the behavior.
Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is one of the most potent ethics commonly used in many situations, such as lawmaking which maximizes the benefit for the greatest number of people in developing codes. Unlike virtue ethics which link right and wrong to character traits and their development, utilitarianism defines as a form of consequentialism, determining right and wrong by “the consequences produced” (Driver, 2014). This application is known as the classical approach to Utilitarianism, which posits correct ethical action maximizes the most benefit for the greatest number. Classical Utilitarianism forms from philosophers Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, who held a similar belief in the utilitarian ethic but differed on application.
Utilitarianism forms from the belief that right and wrong or good and bad are conditions of pain and pleasure. Bentham viewed utilitarian ethics as the measure of good (pleasure), which benefits the most people with no distinction between forms of pleasure, e.g., smoking pot is equal to reading a book. Mill would add a qualitative element to benefit (pleasure) assigning greater benefit to particular actions over others. As such, Bentham uses a form of quantitative utilitarianism whereas Mill uses a qualitative method, but both applications stress maximizing the benefit for the greatest number of people (Driver, 2014).
Though appearing practical as an ethic, this superficial view becomes lost in complex situations in which decisions become dilemmas, such as choosing individual freedom over the protection of society. For example, pornography presents a challenge when maximizing the benefit for society, and in this instance, Mill’s qualitative Utilitarian approach can be used to determine the quality of pornography’s benefit. However, classic utilitarian application complicates further because pornography can be seen in degrees according to type, and each type may need quantification and qualification. This example shows how classic utilitarian theory can prove difficult to apply, needing to define "what is good” or "beneficial" to maximize this benefit for the greatest number of people.
Deontology
Deontological Ethics, also known as duty ethics, opposes Utilitarianism forming ethics based on what is “morally required, forbidden, or permitted” (Alexander & Moore, 2021). Deontology stands in opposition to virtue ethics on this same ground, assuming that particular ethics hold authority. Assuming a particular set of ethics holds authority, such as the ten commandments in the Bible, restricts all behavior to following those commandments as a duty. This duty means that murder under any circumstance is unethical because the person must uphold the commandment, “Thou shalt not kill.”
Deontology has the advantage of clarifying right and wrong behavior, but like utilitarianism and virtue ethics, complications arise from determining what positions hold authority. If one gives authority to a particular text or belief, they must justify this authority which proves difficult. As such, deontology is expansive with theories that attempt to prove ethics using reason alone to justify the authority of these ethics. Most notably, Immanuel Kant attempts to justify behavior in this way with his famous categorical imperative, “act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law” (Johnson & Cureton, 2022). As such,
All specific moral requirements, according to Kant, are justified by this principle, which means that all immoral actions are irrational because they violate the CI [categorical imperative] (Johnson & Cureton, 2022).
Perhaps most important to understanding deontology is that its application requires an authoritative source of ethics or a system such as Kant’s, allowing ethical behavior's determination in all situations.
Summary
Ethical systems provide a means for making decisions that impact life more often than most people realize. Medical and legal ethics are important areas of study since these ethics furnish the means to resolve dilemmas and guidance for individual and organizational behavior. Most important to realize is that the application of ethics is not perfectly fitted for every situation and studying these systems provides further insight into complex decision making.
References
Alexander, Larry and Michael Moore, "Deontological Ethics", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2021 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <//plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2021/entries/ethics-deontological/>.
Driver, Julia, "The History of Utilitarianism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <//plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/utilitarianism-history/>.
Hursthouse, Rosalind and Glen Pettigrove, "Virtue Ethics", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <//plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/ethics-virtue/>.
Johnson, Robert and Adam Cureton, "Kant’s Moral Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2022 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), forthcoming URL = <//plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2022/entries/kant-moral/>.
Photo by Alex Block on Unsplash
Article Updated: 02/20/2022