Aristotelian ethics as the superior framework for modern ethical behavior

Belak, Jernej; Rozman, Mateja. \"Business Ethics from Aristotle, Kant and Mill\'s

Perspective.\" Kybernetes, vol. 41, no. 10 (2012): 1607-1624.

Duska, Ronald. \"Why Business Ethics Needs Rhetoric: An Aristotelian Perspective.\"

Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 24, no. 1 (2014): 119-134.

Fishman, Stephen; Mccarthy, Lucille. \"Conflicting Uses of \'Happiness\' and the Human

Condition.\" Educational Philosophy and Theory, vol. 45, no. 5 (20130: 509-515.

Kristjansson, K. \"There is Something about Aristotle: the Pros and Cons of Aristotelianism in Contemporary Moral Education.\" Journal of Philosophy of Education, vol. 48, no. 1 (2014): 48-68.

Lickona, T. \"The Return of Character Education.\" Educational Leadership, vol. 51, no.

(1993): 6-11.

Uhr, John. Prudential Public Leadership: Promoting Ethics in Public Policy and Administration. NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015.

Summary of the Issue

The issue of ethics is a relevant one in today\'s world. It is currently at the center of the spotlight on national politics, as questions about ethical behavior swirl around both presidential candidates. Yet, the nation remains roughly divided and the question that the objective observer must ask is, \"What does it mean to be an ethical person?\" At the crux of most systems of ethics are qualities and characteristics like honesty, integrity and compassion. This paper will examine the ethical systems of Aristotle, Kant, and J. S. Mill in order to better understand how ethics may be understood in today\'s world.

As Uhr points out, these three systems of ethics have been highly influential in the West with regard to how leaders are expected to behave: Kant focuses on the intent of behavior, Mill focuses on the effect/impact of behavior, and Aristotle focuses on the virtue of behavior.[footnoteRef:1] From each of these three perspectives, the framework for how to judge actions/behaviors can be shaped. Of these three, the most effective in terms of providing an objective guide for behavior, Aristotle\'s ranks highest.[footnoteRef:2] Aristotelian ethics has been shown to be useful in leadership, public administration and character education. In today\'s world, the subjective intent and the equally difficult to measure impact are insufficient indicators of ethical solutions; Aristotle\'s system, on the other hand, provides answers where the others fail. [1: John Uhr, Prudential Public Leadership: Promoting Ethics in Public Policy and Administration (NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015), 83, 103, 125.] [2: K. Kristjansson, \"There is Something about Aristotle: the Pros and Cons of Aristotelianism in Contemporary Moral Education.\" Journal of Philosophy of Education, vol. 48, no. 1 (2014), 48; T. Lickona, \"The Return of Character Education.\" Educational Leadership, vol. 51, no. 3 (1993), 6; Ronald Duska, \"Why Business Ethics Needs Rhetoric: An Aristotelian Perspective.\" Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 24, no. 1 (2014), 119; Jernej Belak; Rozman, Mateja, \"Business Ethics from Aristotle, Kant and Mill\'s Perspective.\" Kybernetes, vol. 41, no. 10 (2012), 1607.]