Unit 5: Ethics and Politics of Virtue
Prior to any of the theories we have considered so far, most accounts of what it means for a person to be moral, or for a society to be just, centered on some conception of virtue. Aristotle is the most famous proponent of virtue, as the basis for living a good human life and creating a good state. Recently, Alasdair MacIntyre and a growing number of moral and political theorists have returned to the concept of virtue as an antidote to what they interpret as an over-emphasis on individual rights and freedoms, and a neglect of community and tradition in political thought since the Enlightenment. But can our society agree on what living virtuously means?
In this unit, we examine Aristotle's theory of a society organized on the basis of virtue, and some modern communitarian extensions of his general line of thought. We contrast Aristotle's notion of virtue with existentialist concepts of will to power (as in Friedrich Nietszche), and radical freedom and radical responsibility (as in Jean Paul Sartre). We see how these theories bear on certain controversial topics of our day. This discussion will help you consider these types of difficult controversies from a richer, more informed perspective.
Completing this unit should take you approximately 10 hours.
Upon successful completion of this unit, you will be able to:
- describe Aristotle's concepts of merit and justice;
- explain Aristotle's connection between virtuous behavior and state policies;
- compare and contrast Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, and Alasdair MacIntyre on the concepts of freedom and community membership;
- describe the philosophical arguments for and against major political issues, like accessibility accommodations for persons with disabilities, patriotism, and same-sex marriage;
- explain the issue of cultural relativism and whether or not there can be an absolute moral standard applied to all cultures; and
- compare and contrast Friedrich Nietzsche and Jean Paul Sartre on the existentialist concepts of freedom and responsibility.
5.1: Aristotle as a Champion of Merit-Based Justice
Watch the rest of this lecture, from 25:51 to the end. Sandel addresses some of the arguments made in the debate on affirmative action as a form of distributive justice. He introduces Aristotle as an advocate for a different theory of distributive justice: that social goods, such as jobs, political positions, and material goods, should be distributed based on their purpose. That is, Aristotle would argue that the University of Texas Law School should accept only those who are best suited to studying the law.
5.1.1: Overview of Aristotle's Political Theory
Read this overview of Aristotle's Politics.
5.1.2: Aristotle: A Social Order Based on Virtue
Read Book One of Aristotle's Politics. Notice what Aristotle says about the family and politics in the first few chapters. Beginning with Part V, what does Aristotle say about slavery? Notice Aristotle's theoretical and practical comments about property.
5.2: Justice Is Respect for Virtue
Modern and contemporary theories of justice, such as those of John Stuart Mill, Immanuel Kant, and John Rawls, typically divorce the ideas of justice and virtue. The virtues individuals possess should not play a role when deciding how to organize society. Aristotle, on the other hand, makes virtue the basis for his theory of justice. Distributive justice, in Aristotle's account, becomes a way to honor those who display excellence of character.
Watch this lecture until 27:01. Aristotle's notion of good personal ethics and virtue directly relates to his theory of the state. The state has a vested interest in the virtuous behavior of the citizens who live in it, so the state has the power to make paternalistic laws that will moderate people's behavior. The purpose of the human being is to lead a virtuous, flourishing life, and the state has an interest in rewarding the virtuous development of these ideals.
5.3: Virtue vs. Disability: The Case of Casey Martin
Read this U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the case PGA Tour, Inc. v. Casey Martin. The Aristotelian conception of justice which honors individual virtues is called into question in the case of Casey Martin, who sued the PGA for refusing to allow him to use a golf cart during the tour. In this case, the court decided in favor of Martin, and against a virtue-based policy of distributive justice.
5.3.1: Does Respect for Virtue Mean Sacrificing Freedom?
Watch the rest of this lecture, from 27:02. In this lecture, Sandel addresses a major challenge to Aristotle's virtue-based theory of justice. What happens if people want to do something other than what they are best suited for? Should they be denied this freedom in order to maintain an ideal society? Or, is the curtailment of personal freedom unjust? Aristotle's view of natural slavery leads many to accept the latter view.
5.3.2: Aristotle on Citizenship, Justice, and the State
Read Book Three of Aristotle's Politics. Aristotle begins by defining what the state is and what the conditions for citizenship are. The second half of the book is devoted to the topic of justice, and it is here that Aristotle makes his famous argument about equality. For Aristotle, justice is not simply a matter of respecting the equality of all citizens, but of determining in what specific ways people are said to be equal or unequal.
5.3.3: Aristotle on Virtue, Pleasure, and Pain
Read sections 1-3 of Book II from Nicomachean Ethics. In these passages, Aristotle discusses his idea that moral virtue is a matter of habit. He also mentions that the role of good legislators is to instill good habits in the citizens they govern. But in order for the legislators to help citizens develop their virtues, they would first need to know what it means to live virtuously and what specific virtues there are.
5.4: Constrained Freedom: Justice within the Bounds of a Community
Watch this lecture until 24:00. Sandel introduces Kant's criticism of Aristotle's political theory. Kant agrees that the role of the state is to cultivate a virtuous citizenry, but he disagrees that the state should decide in advance what it means to be virtuous. Instead, Kant advocates a framework in which individuals are free to pursue their own visions of what the good life. Communitarians, inspired by Aristotle, resist Kant's (and Rawls') view of individual freedom as too radical and believe that some moral obligations result from the communities of which individuals are a part.
5.4.1: Alasdair MacIntyre and the Virtuous Community
Read this article on Alasdair MacIntyre. MacIntyre has been influential in pointing to a retrieval of virtue ethics. What is the central question of virtue ethics as described in the article? What is one of the major points of his book, After Virtue, concerning the failure of the Enlightenment?
Read this article describing virtue ethics. Define eudaimonia. What were the four cardinal virtues in Ancient Greek ethical thought? Define arete. What is meant by the contemporary aretaic turn?
5.4.2: Patriotism: Virtue of Loyalty or Collective Selfishness?
Watch the rest of this lecture, from 24:01 to the end. Certain communitarian theories would urge that patriotism is an important component of justice and morality, since national traditions and a sense of collective belonging inform the identities of each citizen to some extent. Critics of patriotism argue that it is a kind of prejudice at best, and at worst, can lead to persecution and injustice on a massive scale. In this lecture, Sandel explores the intricacies of this issue as students argue both for and against patriotism.
5.4.3: Ethical Issues Surrounding Patriotism
Read this short piece about patriotism in England. Define patriotism and nationalism. How are these concepts alike and how are they different? What are the positive characteristics of patriotism? What are some of the dangers or pitfalls?
5.5: Justice, the Good, and the Problem of Agreement
Watch this lecture until 24:01. Ask how we can establish a just society without arriving a consensus about what the good is – in this case, the good for same-sex couples and other members of the moral community. In this lecture, Sandel makes the case that questions of morality and justice cannot be separated from questions about the good. The problem, though, is that all members of a society seldom agree on what the good is. This leads to a discussion of same-sex marriage, which was a hotly-contested issue in the United States.
Read the syllabus from the 2003 Supreme Court case Lawrence v. Texas. In this decision, the Supreme Court struck down a previous ruling and affirmed that state laws against sodomy violate the constitutional right to due process. The decision was seen as a major advance for equal rights among the LGBT community. Arguments in the case centered on how we ought to understand the basic concept of liberty.
5.6: Cultural Relativism
- Read the first three sections of Chapter 4 and answer the following questions:
- What was Nietzsche's most famous quote?
- What is the definition of "cultural relativism"?
- How does Nietzsche's eternal return challenge traditional religious beliefs about rewards?
- Are Wallace Souza's actions immoral? Why or Why not?
What three contemporary approaches to ethics offer alternatives to cultural relativism? Which of these alternatives is the best direction? Attempt the exercises at the end of each section.
5.7: Existentialist Ethics
5.7.1: Friedrich Nietzsche
Watch this lecture, from 10:23. This lecture introduces Nietzsche's critique of morality. Nietzsche argues that modern morality is dominated by a limited view of Christian ethics, as passive and subservient rather than powerful. He describes the will to power as a necessary part of living as a fully-actualized noble soul.
5.7.2: Jean-Paul Sartre
Read this lecture for a sense of Jean Paul Sartre's (1905–1980), the French philosopher, conception of existence. For Sartre, first we exist, and then we shape our essence through our choices in life.
5.8: The Relation between Morality and the Law
Watch the rest of this lecture, from 24:02 to the end. In this lecture, Sandel concludes the discussion of justice by asking what cases like same-sex marriage and abortion can tell us about the relation between morality and the law. As you view this video lecture, consider the questions that follow. Is it possible to legislate without imposing moral judgments and unfairly restricting freedoms? In other words, can the government be neutral about divisive moral issues?
Unit 5 Discussion
Post and respond to the following topics on the course discussion board, and respond to other students' posts.
- Consider someone with unusual opinions or unusual goals in life, for example, someone who chooses never to marry. How does this person's decision relate to existentialist ethics (as in Sartre's radical freedom and radical responsibility)? How should this person behave toward people he or she dates? Explain your response.
- How would you weigh economic arguments in favor of same-sex marriage? For example, consider the argument that when people pair up and take care of each other in old age, it decreases financial burdens on our society and government as a whole. Or, consider a student who is applying to college and filling out their financial aid paperwork. If the student is the child of a same-sex couple, then is that student only obligated to report the lower income of one parent, because both parents are not legally married? Is this fair to other students who must report the income of their opposite-sex married parents who need the same financial aid resources?
- Should the state be able to involve itself in cases where citizens, who are adults and who are able to give informed consent, choose to harm themselves? For example, note the different state policies on physician assisted suicide/euthanasia. Explain your response.