The Problem Of A Virtual Unethical Stigma

Aristotle outlined his theory of Virtue Ethics in his book Nicomachean Ethics. Aristotle focused his idea of ethics on agents rather than acts. His main idea is focused on the idea of human character- how can you be a better person? In fact, Aristotle once said: “For we are enquiring not in order to know what virtue is, but in order to become good, since otherwise our enquiry would be of no use.” Aristotle is given the credit for developing the idea of virtue ethics, but many of Plato's cardinal values influenced his ideas. Virtue Ethics is focused on the person's actions, not the consequences of that action. Aristotle believed if you had good moral values, then your actions would be "good" in theory. Rather than defining good actions,

Virtue Theory is one of many different moral theories that exist today. It is based off of Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics which focuses on having an ideal character. The main focus of Virtue Theory is the role of one’s character, which is closely related to its roots in Aristotle. A Virtue Theorist would do things because it is who they themselves are, not because it is good to do them or because they will get something good from doing them.

Virtue ethics is a theory of ethics in moral philosophy in which it emphasizes that the notion of virtue is key to a

The Virtue Theory, also know as Virtue Ethics, refers to the character of each person. This theory states that every person should try for excellence. The characteristics of each individual are made up from their environment that they are a part of. The theory would further suggest

Is affirmative action in higher education needed? This question provokes a myriad of emotions. Is affirmative action antiquated and unneeded in 21st century America? Or are the racial boundaries of this country’s ancestors still in effect? America’s Declaration of Independence states, “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” yet quotas, check marks, and plus factors give minority students advantages in the admission processes of the country’s universities and colleges (NARA).

Racial preference has indisputably favored Caucasian males in society. Recently this dynamic has been debated in all aspects of life, including college admission. Racial bias has intruded on the students’ rights to being treated fairly. Admitting students on merit puts the best individuals into the professional environment. A university’s unprejudiced attitude towards race in applicants eliminates biases, empowers universities to harness the full potential of students’ intellect, and gives students an equal chance at admission.

Arguments against race-sensitive admissions overlap and work in concert with each other. Four main charges encompass many of these seemingly disparate complaints into clear areas of discussion: (1) a moral argument which charges that society should be colorblind; (2) an economic charge that argues race-based policies admit unqualified students, creating a financial burden for institutions; (3) a charge of "social Darwinism" which argues that race-based policies do not allow for normal selection process; and (4) a political charge which questions whether policies effectively service society. In order to establish a position on the issues of race sensitive admissions

Race-conscious admissions policies (and affirmative action policies generally) are subject to strict scrutiny. This standard requires universities to demonstrate that the inclusion of race furthers a compelling governmental interest, and is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest. Of particular importance to the Court is whether “the means chosen ‘fit’ th[e] compelling goal so closely that there is little or no possibility that the motive for the classification was illegitimate racial prejudice or stereotype.” Put differently, universities must demonstrate that including race in the admissions process is necessary to enroll a diverse student body, and is accomplished through means that are reasonably calculated to achieve the educational

Today, the United States illustrates many circumstances of race in which a group of a given descent is discriminated against solely based on their physical appearance, despite the high demand for “equality.” Linda Darling-Hammond states that “the color line divides [populations] still… even in the 21st century” and will continue to divide people in future centuries (“Unequal Opportunity: Race and Education”). Some debacles of race include those of a minority population being targeted, however the opposite is true for those trying to become a part of a college or university. In the college application process, the federal government requires the administrators to ask which race the applicant is from on their college application, in order to

Imagine, your walking down the street looking for a job. You see a sign in the window that says, “Whites encouraged to apply.” Imagine the period in time when just being white got you into a college, without any other considerations of grades or athletic ability. Those were the days of the Jim Crow laws. Now these instances have happened in the past 20 years, through new laws called Affirmative Action. The big argument is over these few years of affirmative action. Have they alleviated the pain of the Jim Crow laws? The answer to that question is no. Especially, in the case of the University of Michigan‘s use of Affirmative Action in the acceptance of students. Using race as

Joseph F. Healy in Race, Ethnicity, Gender, and Class speaks towards the end of the Chapter 5 about institutional discrimination and in turn about affirmative action. Affirmative action being a set of policies and actions which favors certain groups and minorities who have suffered discrimination based on their minority status in the past, this favoritism usually comes into play in relation in employment and education. It is also described in some cases as being “positive discrimination”. Affirmative action was implemented in the 1960’s and 70’s and remains a hot button issue since its implementation and I am personally of the belief that race based affirmative action in university settings in particular is counterproductive and serves no real

What is Aristotle’s virtue ethics theory exactly? Aristotle was one of the first to describe this type of theory and he based it largely on Eudaimonism. “Eudaimonism bases virtues in human flourishing, where flourishing is equated with performing one’s distinctive function well” (Virtue Ethics). For humans, Aristotle believed that our main function is reasoning and to “live well” we would need to reason well. The largest part of virtue ethics is the titular “virtues” that decide whether or not a person was truly flourishing or not.

According to Aristotle virtue is achieving excellence of the soul. (1) For man to become virtuous they must build habits that model virtuous behavior. Aristotle believed that moral virtue forms through habit and no one is born virtuous. Under this premise virtue is both learned and practiced through our behaviors. When one acts in a moral and virtuous way they become more virtuous, the opposite is true also that if one acts in a non-virtuous way they will learn to become less virtuous. To be virtuous you also must maintain a balance which is called the mean.

Virtue ethics is a theory that focuses on character development and what virtues one should obtain to be who they are supposed to be, as oppose to actions. An example of virtue ethics would be someone who is patient, kind, loving, generous, temperance, courage and flourishing as oppose to a person who lies, cheats, and

Virtue ethics has its roots dating back to Plato and Aristotle. The essential question of philosophy for classical philosophers was about how to be happy and for Plato a virtuous soul is what makes one happy (Reynoso , R., 2014). Thus meaning virtue is not just based on the honor system as some