You are on page 1of 2

Questions #5

1. Explain the connection between the good life and the good
person from the theory of virtue ethics and how virtue ethics
differs from both consequentialism and Kantian deontology.
The connection between the good life and the good person is that a
good person follows his or her duty as a human being and follows the
moral exemplar; a good life can go from someone who has a lot of
money to someone that doing good makes him or her happy.
Consequentialism differs from Kantian deontology in the way that the
first one takes as the duty of the person to do anything in order to
create a greater good, this can include immoral acts. While Kantian
deontologys duty in order to achieve this good life involves a
process of finding happiness in virtuous ways and not acting immorally
under any circumstance.
2. Explain the connections among the idea of a moral exemplar,
the complexity of morality, and moral understanding. Trace a
logical development starting from the moral exemplar to moral
understanding.
A moral exemplar is someone who sets a set fine example and serves
as a model for everyone; this example is a what would be considered
as a virtuous action, which requires of moral complexity since the
person who set the example has a certain level of rational and
emotional maturity and sound judgement. This is accomplished by a
process of moral understanding which is a species of practical wisdom;
this involves experience, reflection and training.
3. Explain why, for Aristotle, the virtuous life can only arise out of
the use of reason.
Life only arises out of the use of wisdom for Aristotle, since this wisdom
is achieved, not from books, but from experience and practice. It takes
patience and time to aquire and it involves a lot of trial and fail.
4. How might a virtue ethicist respond to the Who are the moral
role models? and the Conflict and Contradiction problems?
A virtue ethicist might respond to Who are the moral role models by
saying that they vary from person to person and from different
cultures. We decide who our moral roles or exemplars are based on our
own maturity and rational. The more experienced we are, the more
likely we are to choose the right moral role. As for Conflict and
Contradiction a virtue ethicist would say that if too many virtuous

people have different opinions in a subject, then we are no longer


obligated to say if that action is right or wrong.
5. How would you respond to the priority problem as the author
explains it, using the example of rape? Is this problem fatal to
virtue ethics?
I agree with the second statement made by the author, Rape is not
wrong because good people oppose it. They oppose it because it is
wrong (pg. 271) This is based on the idea that virtuous people would
never support rape because it is immoral, thus we should oppose it for
the same reason, and not just because good people oppose it. This
problem would be fatal if people lacked of moral understanding since
then they would be blindly following what the good person says.