Virtue ethics: principles and philosophical foundations

Virtue Ethics

Virtue-based vs. duty-based ethics: arguments and examples from Victor Hugo, Aristotle, Bernard Mayo, Nathaniel Hawthorne, and William Frankena

In the study of ethics and morality, there have been theoretical foundations in which it was argued that morality comes with being rather than doing, or that a true moral life is one that is a product of doing instead of being. Or, oftentimes, theoreticians and philosophers contend that morality must bear an existence of both concepts -- that is, that morality entails both doing and being.

In the study of the works of the philosophers and writers Victor Hugo, Aristotle, Bernard Mayo, Nathaniel Hawthorne, and William Frankena, it becomes evident that they have various opinions about the issue at hand: is morality simply a matter of doing good works, or one must have the right principles in order to become moral? Through their writings, each had contented their stance or position concerning this theoretical ethical problem.

Thus, in the analysis, this paper argues that in general, the cited writers have considered duty-based ethics as one that truly defines morality, although this position is tempered by another discipline, which provides a 'middle ground' to the argument, stating that one must have the ethical principles and conduct in order to become moral. Apparently, all of the philosophers believed that morality must be duty-based or a mixture or combination of virtue and duty, while none had shown preference for a purely virtue-based ethic.

The texts that follow provide the analysis and discussion of this thesis, with references to the works of each author.

Bernard Mayo, Victor Hugo, and Nathaniel Hawthorne had expressed their belief that a duty-based ethic determines a moral individual through their written works on philosophy and literature. In "Virtue and the Moral Life," Mayo expounds on his idea about what constitutes a moral life: for him, a life lived ethically is more moral than a life guided, though not necessarily lived, through ethical and moral principles. This means that the philosopher considers an individual as having morals when s/he is able to go beyond abstraction, and take action for what s/he believes as an ethical and moral action. The ability to transcend from the ideal to the real plane is expressed in the philosopher's explication of his preference for a duty-based ethic: "A person's character is not merely a list of dispositions; it has the organic unity of something that is more than the sum of its parts. And we can say, in answer to our morally perplexed questioner, not only "Be this" and "Be that," but also "Be like So-and-So" -- where So-and-So is either an ideal type or character, or else an actual person taken as representative of the ideal, as exemplar.

Hence, Mayo resorts to "saints and heroes" as these ideal types of individuals who have shown through their action what it means to be moral in human society. By determining these ideal types, he had successfully and concretely illustrated to his readers the main difference between 'being' and 'doing'; and how each has an altogether different idea or concept, and thus, different in their degree of morality. However, this does not mean that 'being' or having a set of moral and ethical principles is immoral, but rather, one has failed to realize his/her potential to exercise one's capability to become moral.

A similar point is expressed in Nathaniel Hawthorne's "The Great Stone Face." In this short story, the protagonist, Ernest, embodies the individual who, despite his good works, have failed to recognize himself as the embodiment of morality primarily because he has failed to realize that he possesses the capability to become moral. Hawthorne's representation of Ernest is complicated, because he utilizes him as both a believer and doer of ethical and moral principles, though he has yet to acknowledge the fact that he is doing good works, and that, in fact, he is a moral person. In the last part of the story, the writer expresses his point on duty-based ethic as follows: "The prophecy was fulfilled. But Ernest, having finished what he had to say, took the poet's arm, and walked slowly homeward, still hoping that some wiser and better man than himself would by and by appear, bearing the resemblance to the GREAT STONE FACE [sic]."

One of the reflections given in this short story is that the quest towards morality is never-ending. Perhaps what Hawthorne wanted to extend to his readers is that, despite the evident morality that emerged from a duty-based ethic, this does not mean that one is absolutely moral. As with the other individuals who had been given the privilege and honor of resembling the Great Stone Face, Ernest and these people are just representations of the multiple facets of morality. Thus, Ernest represents duty-based ethic, and the statement "still hoping that some wiser and better man than himself would by and by appear" suggests that there is another facet of morality that humanity has yet to ponder and determine. Thus, morality is an infinite concept devoid of any absolute definition or meaning.

Victor Hugo in "Les Miserables" had also expressed agreement over the claim that morality is a never-ending conquest for humanity. However, he has shown a stronger position of believing in duty-based ethic than Hawthorne. In his novel, Hugo represents through the character of Bishop Bienvenu the embodiment of an individual who has not expressed belief in moral and ethical principles, yet manifests these beliefs through his good works. Bienvenu is best portrayed through Mdlle. Baptistine, who described the Bishop's character as "something truly evangelical in this delicacy which abstains from sermonizing, moralizing and making allusions ... " From these reflections, it became apparent that one need not have known moral and ethical principles, and that by doing moral and ethical acts does one only and truly achieve morality. In effect, Hugo's belief in duty-based ethic is sufficiently exemplified in Bienvenu's character.

From the analyses of Mayo, Hawthorne, and Hugo's works, it is shown that morality is, at best, a real concept that can only be recognized and determined if one sees it. Unlike virtue-based ethics, one need not go into details, enumerating his/her moral and ethical beliefs for people to believe that he or she is moral; rather, doing good works are proof already of one's morality.

Aristotle and Frankena, meanwhile, offers a "middle ground" in understanding morality. Rather than arguing that there is indeed a difference between virtue- and duty-based ethics, or choosing one over the other, they instead asserted that both virtue- and duty-based ethics complement each other. That is, one cannot exist without the other. This position is elucidated further in their philosophical works.