Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics
Historical Background
• Virtue ethics is an ethical theory developed by Aristotle in his
book Nicomachean Ethics. In this particular book, Aristotle offers
moral principles of conduct that would guide human actions in
attaining the “good life”.
• Aristotle was a student of Plato in the Academia, Athens who
founded his own school, the Lyceum, because of his intellectual
differences with Plato.
• The formulation of virtue ethics is primarily grounded in the
Greeks tradition, which demonstrates theories essential for the
moral development of the entire morally capacitated beings.
Meaning of Virtue Ethics
• Virtue ethics is defined as an approach to ethics that
emphasizes the person’s character in moral thinking.
• This theory further posits that the basic function of
morality is the moral character of persons. Rather than
following a set of rules, what must be cultivated instead
is the character of the person.
• This means that “character” is essential to the person’s
achievement of the “good”.
• In any moral situations, virtue ethics does not
provide the moral agent specific principles to
guide his/her actions. What virtue ethics
provides in attaining the good are simply ideal
behaviors, traits, and characters.
• Thus, for Aristotelian ethics, practical wisdom is
a central category that can help individual
become virtuous.
• Practical wisdom is a moral skill that enables a
person to discern what’s right from what’s
wrong, to be able to know how to respond to
everyday moral situations.
• Unlike consequentialist theories, which focus on the
consequences of one’s action as the definitive basis for
the rightness or wrongness of one’s actions, virtue
ethics, on the other hand, emphasizes the person’s
practical moral development which is key to the
attainment of authentic happiness.
• For this reason, virtue ethics deals with broader
questions like:
What kind of life should I live? What is the good life?
How can I be consistent in my moral actions?
• To fully understand Aristotle’s ethics, we must take into
consideration the notions of virtue, telos, and good habit
because these concepts will help us understand the true
On Happiness
• Aristotle’s concept of happiness differs from that of
Socrates and Plato’s happiness because for Aristotle,
happiness only consists in virtuous activity.
• Happiness or eudaimonia is the ultimate goal or end
of human life. This happiness or the ultimate end is
genuinely desired for its own sake or without
qualification.
• So, actions which precede this end become the most
valuable and cannot be superseded by any actions
driven by ordinary kinds of ends.
• Like Eudaimonia, pleasure is also good. That’s why,
Aristotle does not condemn man for desiring
pleasure because it is a significant part in human
flourishing.
• But for Aristotle, the desire and actions that lead to
pleasure only presuppose limited value since its end
is temporary. Hence, the satisfaction that one gets
from these actions cannot be truly called happiness.
• For Aristotle, these actions which only lead humans
into the pit of two opposing vices (either excess or
deficiency), drive them away from the ultimate end.
The Concept of Virtue
• For Aristotle, only virtuous acts can lead man toward living
the good life or happiness.
• Virtue is defined as a behavior showing high moral
standards or the general quality of goodness in a person. It
is categorically described as the opposite of vice.
• Vices, according to Aristotle, are the two extremes of the
spectrum – one is the excess and the other is the deficiency.
It is for this reason that virtues are the mean or the middle
ground between the excess at one side and the deficiency
at the other.
• A virtuous behavior means practicing moderation –
that is avoiding excess and deficiency.
• Aristotle calls this the doctrine of the mean. Doctrine
of the mean is a principle that suggests that a moral
behavior is one that is in the middle of two extremes.
For example:
o Between shameless and touchiness is MODESTY.
o If a moral agent maintains patience or good temper
(mean) and rejects irascibility (excess) or lack of
spirit (deficiency), then he is said to have possessed
virtue.
TABLE OF ARISTOTLE’S VIRTUES AND VICES
Sphere of Excess (Vice) Mean (Virtue) Deficiency
Feeling or (Vice)
Action
Fear and Rashness Courage Cowardice
Confidence
Pleasure and Pain Self-Indulgence Temperance Insensibility
Getting and Prodigality Liberality Meanness
Spending
Honor and Ambition Proper Ambition Unambitiousness
Dishonor
Anger Irascibility Patience Lack of Spirit
Self-Expression Boastfulness Truthfulness Mock Modesty
Indignation Envy Righteous Spitefulness
Indignation
Telos: The Ultimate End
• The Greek word telos is translated as “result” or
“end”. Its verb form teleo means “to come to an end”.
• Aristotle conveys two distinct notions of end, namely:
a. Telos as ordinary ends, which is composed of
hierarchy (lower and higher ends).
b. Telos as the ultimate achievement of human
being (the final end)
• Ordinary ends signify a goal wherein
accomplishments are simply viewed as
byproducts of human beings’ common desire.
This goal is the stopping point, but it is not
really the final or the ultimate one.
• Since it is ordinary, it entails only temporary
fulfilment from one’s experience of an apparent
good. At this juncture, telos is indeed the point
of completion of an activity that an individual
wishes to achieve because of the foreseen
apparent good.
Consider these two examples as guides:
1. Mario decides to play basketball. Most likely, he
wants to solely experience pleasure by playing the
game itself or by winning it, or to maintain a healthy
body, or something else which prompts and
motivates him to play the game. However, when he is
about to play basketball, he remembers that he has
an appointment with his thesis adviser on the same
time. Consequently, he cancels the game and
proceeds immediately to his adviser.
2. Maria studies hard all the lessons in school
because she wants to earn higher grades in all her
subjects so that, later, she might become a scholar.
• If we examine these examples tightly, both
demonstrate ends which correspond to the desired
good. So in this context, every human person is
directed toward a goal or end which is good because
such good is, most of all, the desired end.
• The end (telos) of the actions in these examples is
simply viewed as an ordinary end towards an
ordinary good.
• In the first example, Mario opted to see his thesis
advisor rather than play basketball. For sure,
choosing basketball is a lower end, while choosing to
see the advisor is a higher end, which other higher
ends are possibly attached (e.g. to finish his thesis
• In addition to the idea of hierarchy of ends, we may
also talk about a series of ends. This statement is
clearly manifested in the second example whereby
higher ends determines the extent to which lower
end is worth pursuing. Thus, Maria’s desires for
higher grades in order to achieve an honorable
reward during the graduation ceremony becomes a
springboard for another higher ends, such as
landing on a good job in the future.
• In these series of ends, there is this pattern of
relations between lower and higher ends, which is
also applicable to other modes of action which
involves desirable result.
• But the series of ends cannot go on ad
infinitum (toward infinity).
• For Aristotle, there must be an apex of the
hierarchy which is also known as the ultimate
end or the highest good. This is because,
without the highest good as the ultimate end,
there would be no reason for a rational being
to act morally.
• And again, for Aristotle, the highest good as
the ultimate end of moral action is happiness
without qualification.
