Utilitarianism And Virtue Ethics

“The rapid changes caused new problems- economic faulty, thoughtless and unethical decisions have led to unpleasant consequences such as failed businesses, deteriorated relationships, and conflicts in society as well as in organizations”. To put in other words, the main problem is the lack of ethics and virtues in business that have resulted in wicked outcomes which affected on only businesses but the society in general as well. In his essay entitled “Vocational Virtue Ethics: Prospects for a Virtue Ethic Approach to Business”, David McPherson concludes by proposing a number of solutions as to how business organizations must overcome this problem that challenges to vocational virtue ethics. In this essay, I focus on analyzing three of the solutions, to wit, having a clear mission statement and hiring employees according to their willingness to commit to it, possessing a moral leadership, and reducing the tendency to avarice.

Luke is in charge of ABC Company’s land development project in building an adult entertainment store on the land they recently purchased. Unfortunately, his brother, Owen, happens to live in the same area. Luke remembers Owen once told him he is thinking about selling his house, since he recently received a decent offer from a real estate firm. However, he is debating whether he should sell it or waits for the real estate to rise. Luke realizes with the appearance of adult entertainment in the near future, the values of Owen’s house and other houses in neighborhood are likely to drop significantly.

Regarding the case of the Citicorp Building, utilitarianism and virtue ethics have interestingly similar views.

Virtue ethics focuses on the benefits, or ethical personality, whereas deontology focuses on responsibilities or guidelines. Utilitarianism focuses on the repercussions of activities. Virtue ethics is also called agent-based or personality ethics. When using the quality principles approach, one should take the point of view that in living their lifestyle they should try growing quality in all that they do (Boylan, Chapter 11, 2009). Utilitarianism is a way of consequentialism; significance that the ethical worth of an activity is established by its results. Utilitarianism indicates that an activity is fairly right when that activity generates more total application for the group than any other alternative (Boylan, Chapter 12, 2009). Deontological principles mostly judge the activity, depending on the action's sticking with a concept or guidelines. This principle uses guidelines and responsibilities to determine what is “right.” Deontology preserves the wrongness of activities in the kind of activity that it is, rather than the repercussions it triggers.

A variety of ethics theories can be applied to this particular situation, however only two will be discussed in detail. Virtue ethics and utilitarianism are relevant in the scenario regarding the conjoined twins. Virtue ethics is described as being “an action is right if and only if it is what a virtuous agent would do in similar circumstances” (Shockley). Utilitarianism is a part of consequential ethics and it basically states that whatever benefits the needs of the majority is superior to those of a minority.

For example, Utilitarianism supports a "courageous action" if the person has a "quality of courage" and his or her action results in the "increase ...of the sum total of human happiness." In this example, virtues are still applied to the character of the individual, however, the action must still promote the highest net benefit. Deontology relies on a duty or an "obligation" which can then promote a desired or ethical character. The means or actions themselves must be ethical, in order to classify the character of the individual ethical. Utilitarianism cannot promote virtue by justifying the means instead of the ends.

you ask what the virtues are, it is likely you would be told that we

After filling out the Ethical Inventory again I found that Utilitarianism and Virtue Ethics are the two areas that made the most persuasive thinking for me. Utilitarianism looks at the consequences and weighs the positives to see if it is going to bring happiness to the greater number. Every situation is looked at from a pros and cons point of view and a decision is made from there. One statement that is on the inventory sheet says, “When I am trying to decide what the right thing to do is, I look at the consequences of the various alternatives open to me.” In this example for myself I usually don’t think about consequences and react on emotions. After reacting from emotions I think about the consequences and realize most of the time it wasn’t the right thing to do. There are many times that I react and then realize I could’ve done things differently in that situation. I think about my own self interest before I think about the effects of the greater number. I see myself now looking at the situation and seeing both sides of it. I look at the positives and negatives before I react on emotions. By learning more about utilitarianism and changing my thought process I see my virtue ethics in a different perspective compared to what I did before this class. All the virtues that are stated in the book are virtues I hold very deeply in myself. These virtues are courage, generosity, honesty, loyalty to friends and family. Courage was one I had a hard time with because I don’t always

Utilitarianism: “The idea that an action is right, as long as it promotes happiness, and that the greatest happiness of the greatest number should be the guiding principle of conduct (Oxford Dictionaries).” This theory was thought up as far back as the 17th century, but didn’t become well known until late into the 18th century when Jeremy Bentham a legal and social reformer gave a powerful presentation of the idea. “Create all the happiness you are able to create; remove all the misery you are able to remove. Every day will allow you, will invite you to add something to the pleasure of others, or to diminish something of their pains (Jeremey Bentham).” Deontology: “An ethical theory that the morality of an action should be based on whether

Virtue ethics is a normative theory whose foundations were laid by Aristotle. This theory approaches normative ethics in substantially different ways than consequentialist and deontological theories. In this essay, I will contrast and compare virtue ethics to utilitarianism, ethical egoism, and Kantianism to demonstrate these differences. There is one fundamental aspect of virtue ethics that sets it apart from the other theories I will discuss. For the sake of brevity and to avoid redundancy, I will address it separately. This is the fundamental difference between acting ethically within utilitarianism, egoism, and Kantianism. And being ethical within virtue ethics. The other theories seek to define the ethics of actions while virtue ethics does not judge actions in any way. The other theories deal with how we should act, while virtue ethics determines how we should be.

While utilitarian approach is based on the society as a whole, Aristotle’s virtue ethics gives us perspectives on harm reduction from an individualistic point of view. Aristotle defines good in terms of something we aim at and is related to the function one performs in a community. Society, for Aristotle is a conglomeration of citizens with good character, where each one performs the specific function assigned to him in the best possible manner. (Macintyre 2002: 52; Aristotle Politics Book II) Virtue ethics, unlike utilitarianism is not concerned with specific actions under specific circumstances, but rather with the ‘character’ of the individual (Aristotle Ethics Book II). While Ethics prescribes the kind of life we must lead to attain eudaemonia,

It may initially be identified as the one that emphasizes the virtues, or moral character, in contrast to the approach that emphasizes duties or rules or that emphasizes the consequences of actions. Here are some examples of these normative ethics. A person is in need and it is clear that this person needs to be helped. A utilitarian will go to help this person to the fact that the outcome of doing so will maximize well-being, in the other hand the deontologist would go and help this person to the fact that, in doing so the agent will be acting in accordance with a moral rule such as “Do unto others as you would be done by” and the last one, a virtue ethicist would go and help this person to the fact that helping the person would be helpful or

Virtue ethics hones in on the character of a person rather than on the consequences or rightness or wrongness of an action . Unlike Utilitarianism which equates “more” to happiness, Virtue ethics supports the belief that practicing good virtues such as reliability, trust, love and generosity will lead one to a life of happiness. Virtue ethics paints a picture of peace, harmony and serenity. Provis (2010) shares that Virtue is in part an inclination to act well, but in part also an ability developed from experience, to judge what is right.

Virtue, when I hear that word I think of value and morality and only good people can be virtuous. When I hear the word ethics I think of good versus evil, wrong and right. Now when the two are put together you get virtue ethics. You may wonder what can virtue ethics possibly mean. It’s just two words put together to form some type of fancy theory. Well this paper will discuss virtue ethics and the philosophy behind it.

A major area in which philosophy can intersect with our daily lives is in how we justify our decisions. In the case of a homeless person asking for change, there are a multitude of actions we may take. The choice we make comes down to what we believe is the morally right thing to do. In this paper, I will analyze the situation of a homeless person asking for change through the lenses of utilitarianism, kantian, and virtue ethics.