Week 4 begins! I have a few thoughts in regards to the following ethical systems:
Aristotle's
Virtue Ethics: Of all the ethical systems I find Aristotle's most
appealing, but I have a few issues with his system:
- Aristotle
believed what differentiates humans from animals was reason (i would
agree), so to be a virtuous human would mean to reason well or reason
with excellence. Problem: What about love? Not family love or sexual
love, but the ability to even love (seek the well being) our enemies.
Would this not be virtuous or excellence? Also, what if I am
intellectually handicapped, or suffer a traumatic brain injury that
impairs my ability to reason; am I now less virtuous? What if I reason
poorly but love deeply?
Confucian Role Ethics: Confucian
ethical system is like Virtue Ethics, but heavily emphasizes the
relation/social nature of being human more than reasoning. To be an
excellent or virtuous father depends on how I provide for and protect my
family; to be an excellent or virtuous eldest son depends on how I
honor my father and what kind of example I set for the younger
siblings. My virtue depends on how well I perform my social role in
thought, word, and deed. Problem:
- Confucian ethics does
not separate the individual from their role in the family and society,
in fact, the state is considered the extension or the incorporation of
the family.
- The parts have no value apart from the whole.
In my opinion the systems then become the source of value rather than
the human beings that form the systems. It is like the question "what
comes first the chicken or the egg"; what came first the human being or
the social systems we now inhabit. Are we born for a role, for society
sake or are we born into society in which we are valued for being human?
Michael Martin
TOTT (Think on These Things)